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 9 1915

The Plaintiff sued.alleging breach of the agreement the cosideration being that out of I1 490 advanced by Plaintiff "from time to time X750 was to be paid back by Defendants and to be accepted by Plaintiff in full discharge of the loans if there was no breach of the scontract in respect of the publication of comments as aforesaid. [...] The question for the Court was whether the agreement was consistent with the carrying on of the newspaper in the public interest and his Lordship agreed with the view that a newpaper had no more duty to say defamatory things than a private individual. [...] It was contended by the Vakil for the Appellant that the sole question for detemination in the suit was whether Gangaram had any share at all in the disputed properties ; that the Defendants specifically took the plea that Gangararn had no share and so Plaintiffs' 'suit failed on that ground; that the learned Munsif upon the evidence disbelieved the Plaintiffs' case and held that neitherGangara [...] The whole trial was vitiated by the above finding on such a vital point in the case and the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge ought to be set aside and the case remanded for trial on the merits. [...] Held that the finding of the Subordinate Judge could be interfered with in second appeal inasmuch as it was not based upon any evidence but on the other hand was directly contrary to the pleadings in the suit ; and the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge were set aside and the case was remanded for trial on the merits.