The Calcutta Weekly Notes Monday December 1 1941

As Lord Stowell has said whenever the Company’s charter required renewal at the hands of Parliament “ the high or as I may almost say this empyrean sovereignty of the Moghul was brought down from the clouds as it were for puposes of policy.” The consequence of this on the legal system was that it was not possible to suppose that the Courts of the Company in the exercise of Diwani Were Eng [...] The position in the Presidency towns as created by the Charters of 1726 and 1753 was different but outside the Presidency towns it was the logical consequence of the Courts being Courts of the Emperor's Diwan that they administered the laws of the Hindus and the Mahommedans—the personal law. [...] In the beginning the phrase was not intended to point to the law of England or the doctrines of the Court of Chancery. [...] The phrase had first occurred in the charter of Charles II which empowered the Company to erect Courts of judicature "to decide according to equity and good conscience and according to the law and custom of merchants " but the dicretion conferred by the provision was used by the servants of the Company in a liberal spirit. [...] In order to ascertain the real nature of the relief claimed by the Plaintiff the sustance of the plaint must be considered and the mere fact that the relief as stated in the prayer clause is expressed in a declaratory form would not necessarily show that the suit is for a mere declaration and no more.