Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 39 (0.23 seconds)

Midnapore Zemindari Company Ld. vs Naresh Narain Roy on 28 August, 1911

25. We will now deal with the cases cited on behalf of the appellants. Strong reliance was placed on the decision in Midnapore Zamindari v. Naresh Narain Roy, ILR 39 Cal 220. In that case, the facts arc that a decree for possession and mesne profits was obtained in 1906 against Messrs. Robery Watson and Co., Ltd. During the pendency of the suit, the Midnapore Zamindari Company purchased certain properties in dispute. They did not apply to have their names added as defendants in the pending action.
Calcutta High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 33 - Full Document

Puran Chand Nahatta vs Manmotho Nath Mukherjee on 5 December, 1927

It was held that as purchasers pendente lite the proceedings could be continued against them. The question that falls to be determined in this case viz., whether the decree for mesne profits which does not create a charge is enforceable against the specific property covered by the sale did not arise for determination in this case. Mr. Venkatarama Sastry cited the decision of the Privy Council in Puran Chand v. Monmotho Nath. AIR 1928 P C 38.
Bombay High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 17 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next