Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.16 seconds)

Raj Krishna Dey vs Bipin Bihari Dey And Ors. on 17 July, 1912

242 while there is also authority perhaps preponderant in favour of the view that although the plaintiff can always put his own valuation on the relief he claims the Court is also competent to exercise its powers conferred on it by Order 7, Rule 11, Civil P.C., e.g. Umatul Batul v. Nauji Kuar [1907] 6 C.L.J. 427 Krishna Das Laha v. Hari Charan Banerji [1911] 10 I.C. 865 and Raj Krishna Dey v. Bepin Bihari Dey [1913] 40 Cal. 245.
Calcutta High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 11 - Full Document

The Official Trustee Of Bengal vs Gobardhan Guchait And Ors. on 10 May, 1928

The Judicial Committee, however, in a case from Bombay made some remarks which may not unreasonably be regarded as approving of the words of the statute being strictly applied : Sundara Bai v. The Collector of Belgaun A.I.R. 1918 P.C. 135, and which have been so understood in the case of the Official Trustee of Bengal v. Gobardhan Guchait [1929] 118 I.C. 357 and Bal Krishna Narayan v. Jankibai Sitaram [1920] 44 Bom. 331.
Calcutta High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1