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 Short Notes of Important Decisions of other High Courts in India  Monday  May 4  1936

Premium

20.500.12592/wtn58k

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 Short Notes of Important Decisions of other High Courts in India Monday May 4 1936

1936

In such a case what is the remedy of the other co-sharers B and C for the recovery of the balance of the " landlord's transfer fee "? The Act appears to be silent on the point. [...] After the attai'nrnent of majority by the minor the guardian brought the suit for the recovery of the monies so advanced: Held (DALIP SINGH and Blum JJ.) — That as the de facto guardian was entitled to sue the minor during his minority for the recovery of the money advanced by-him he was only in the position of a person advancing monies on behalf of another and therefore Art. [...] 61 of the Limitation Act was applicable to the case and the starting point of limitation would be the date of the advance. [...] An intention to wrongfully deprive the owner of the use of the property for a time and to secure the use of the property for his own benefit for a time may be sufficient. [...] (1) (b) the Court must hold having regard to the nature of the strike and the circumstances prevailing at the date of the instigation or other acts specified in sec.
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 Short Notes of Important Decisions of other High Courts in India Monday May 4 1936
xcvii-c unknown view

Related Topics

All