Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 45 (1.39 seconds)
Prafulla Kamini Roy Wondow Of Taranath ... vs Bhabani Nath Roy And Ors. on 8 July, 1925 cites

Bhaidas Shivdas vs Bai Gulab on 25 October, 1921

Since Bhaidas' case 60 Ind. Cas. 822 : 45 B. 718 : 40 M.L.J. 519 : 25 C.W.N. 605 : 33 C.L.J. 488 : 19 A.L.J. 409 : 23 Bom. L.R. 623 : 3 U.P.L.R. (P.C.) 22 : 14 L.W. 7 : (1921) M.W.N. 408 : 29 M.L.T. 350 : 30 M.L.T. 149 : 48 I.A. 181 (P.C.), the Calcutta High Court in at least three cases has acted upon the view which I entertain of the meaning and effect of the judgment of the Privy Council in that case, although my brother Walmsley at one time felt himself constrained by the language used to take a different view of the meaning to be attributed to the judgment of the Judicial Committee.
Bombay High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 51 - Full Document

Gossami Sri Sri Gridhariji Maharaj ... vs Purushotum Gossami And Ors. on 5 June, 1884

But for that judgment, I should without hesitation have followed the directions of Section 98, C.P.C., for I am satisfied that since 1884 when the Full Bench delivered judgment in the case of Gossami Sri Sri Gridharji Maharaj Tickait v. Purushotum Gossami 10 C. 814 : 5 Ind. Dec. (N.S.) 545, it has been the practice of this Court to adopt the principle of affirmance when there has been a difference of opinion between two Judges hearing an appeal on the Appellate side; and in, my view that practice is just as correct under the present Code as it was under the Code of 1882.
Calcutta High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 27 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 Next