Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 32 (1.19 seconds)

Vairavan Chettiar And Anr. vs Avicha Chettiar And Ors. on 29 April, 1913

Although in ' 35 Mad 1 (FB) (G)' he appeared to overrule his own previous judgments, another Bench of our High Court, Oldfield and Ramesam JJ. in -- 'Vairavan, Chettiar v. Ramanathan Chettiar', 14 Mad LW 701 (Z24) followed '24 Mad 358 (Z22)' and did not regard it as overruled by '35 Mad 1 (FB) (G)'. Did, with respect, those learned Judges tacitly disapprove the tests and the definition of Sir Arnold White C. J, in, at any rate, some respects?
Madras High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 8 - Full Document

Mabulla Sardar And Ors. vs Hemangini Debi And Ors. on 25 February, 1910

But the distinction between existence of jurisdiction and exercise of jurisdiction has not always been borne in mind and this has sometimes led to confusion (see -- 'Mabulla v. Hemangini', 11 Cal LJ 512 (Z29) and -- 'Moser v. Marsden', 1892-1 Ch 487 (Z30), ' where the term Jurisdiction is used to denote the authority of the Court to make an order of a particular description). We must not thus overlook the cardinal position that in order that jurisdiction may be exercised, there must be case legally before the Court and a hearing as well as a determination."
Calcutta High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 12 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next