cover image: 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  June 4  1928

Premium

20.500.12592/kb36x2

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 June 4 1928

1928

The present state of the law however warrants the conclusion that there is no difference between the two forms of contract as to the nature of the invasion required. [...] It was urged on behalf of the Defendiirits that the suit was barred by the special rule of limitation and that the sale was binding up' ii the Plaintiffs as Hiraman represented them in the suit for rent: Held (per SEN AND ALLANSON JJ.)- (1) That when a landlord puts a holding to sale in execution of a rent decree dipossession by the purchaser does not amount to dispossession by the landlord. [...] (2) That in a rent suit the landlord must ordinarily implead all the co-tenants incluing the heirs of a deceased co-tenant and the question whether one of several tenants represents the others is a question of fact depending upon the circumstances of each Case. [...] In a suit for recovery of possession of certain properties by the Plaintiffs claiing to be the reversioners of one Ishar Dayal it was found that the eight-annas Share of the properties belonged to Gobind a brother of Ishar Dayal and after Gobind's death the widow of Ishar Dayal had got into possession of the share of Gobind and possessed it for more than 12years. [...] the order of the trial Court : Held—That no appeal lay to the District Court against the order of the trial Court refusing permission to the purchaser of a. portion of the non-transferable occupancy.
law
Pages
4
Published in
India
SARF Document ID
sarf.100104
Segment Pages Author Actions
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 June 4 1928
cxxix-cxxxii unknown view

Related Topics

All