Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.21 seconds)
Langar Mahton And Ors. vs Radha Mahton And Ors. on 13 July, 1953 cites

Behary Lall Trigunait vs Darby on 24 July, 1894

Mr. Kameshwar Dayal also relied upon the case of --'Behary Lall v. Darby', 21 Cal 915 (B). In this case, the proceedings were instituted against a person who happened to be the karpardaz of a lady and her children. The lady and her children had hot been made parties to the proceeding. It was observed that the dispute was really not between the karpardaz and the other side but between the lady and her children on the one side and the second party on the other side and it was held that in the circumstances, the proceedings were bad and were set aside.
Calcutta High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 10 - Full Document

Brij Pal Singh And Anr. vs Ram Naresh Singh And Ors. on 18 November, 1931

In a case of the Allahabad High Court reported in -- 'Brij Pal Singh v. Ram Naresh Singh', AIR 1932 All 325 (H), it was observed that it would be extremely difficult to prove the exact sum spent in costs in a semi-criminal case such as one under Section 145, Criminal P. C., and it was further stated that in such cases the Court may very well use its discretion in awarding an amount which it considers reasonable. I do not, therefore, think that the learned Magistrate in the present case has wrongly exercised his judicial discretion in the matter of awarding costs. He was clearly aware that pleader's fees and witnesses' costs may be taken into consideration. In my opinion, the learned Magistrate has committed no error of law by not having held an inquiry regarding the actual amount of costs incurred in the case by the first party. He has, in my judgment, exercised his discretion within the terms of Sub-section (3) of Section 148 and the amount awarded by him is not unreasonable.
Allahabad High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 6 - Full Document
1