The Calcutta Weekly Notes Law Notes and Notes of Cases of the Calcutta High Court and of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and the English Law Courts Monday August 16 1909

It seems to be conceded on all hands that since the hill has not been submitted to any responsible law officer of the Crown or to the High Court for opinion it ought to stand over and under the circumstances we think that the Government will not be weladvised in rushing the Bill through the Council in the face of such unanimity of opinion. [...] In the case of an entry into a house by a person to search for stolen property belonging to him in spite of the remontrances of the complainant held per Geidt J. that the natural consequences of the search against the complainant's protests was to cause annoyance which was a result the accused knew would follow. [...] But it is impossible to say that the charge is clearly intended to refer to the second occurrence." Their Lordships then rmarked that the judgments of the two lower Courts did not Show of which of his two actions the Pettioner was convicted and that the conviction and the sentence could not under the circumstances be sustained. [...] But here although the first order was made on the 4th May we find that no action was taken to deal effectively with the danger until just before the close of the period covered by the order and that that action was taken not on the initiative of the Magistrate but on the application of the opposite party Under the Chater Act we have the power to review orders under sec. [...] One of the objections urged on behalf of the Appelant was that the Subordinate Judge ought not to have directed a partition till the Plaintiff had included in the suit properties jointly owned by the Plaintiff and the Defendant as well as other parties.