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 April 24 1911

Justice Eve came to the conclusion that upon the question of the construction of the agreement the manufac wring and selling of magarine by the Defendant as threatened and intened by him would not be a breach of the agrement. [...] With reference to the question of rectification of the agreement on the ground that so construed it failed to express the real bargain come to between the parties his Lordship held that the Plaintiffs had not established the existence of any agreement antecedent to the written one and consequently there was no case for rectification and he therefore dismissed the action with costs. [...] But unless the case can be brought within some of these exceptions it is the duty of the Court which is presumed to understand the English language to construe the document accoring to the ordinary grammatical meaning of the words used and without reference to anythipg which has previously passed between the parties. [...] On the 30th November 1904 the said District Judge dimissed the Petitioners' claim on the ground that in the family of the parties the rule of primogniture prevailed as a binding custom and that as a result the Defendant was alone entitled to succeed to the estate. [...] The said appeal was heard before a Divsion Bench of the said Court and judgment prnounced on the 21st December 1906 whereby the Petitioners' appeal was allowed and the decree of the lower Court modified to the extent of granting the Petitioners' claim in respect of all property acquired by the late rais after the date of the proclamation of the Governor-General in Council in 1849 deprivi