The Calcutta Law Journal Short Notes of Cases Articles and other Matters September October November 1909

1809 when in the case of Raniganga Deo v. Doorgamunec Jobraj (I) (Tippera Raj) the family custom that the person appointed Jubraj succeeds to the Raj in preference to the next of kin was upheld by the Sudder Dewany Adawlat in conformity with the opinion given by the Pundits as to its legality having existed in the family of the parties for many generations. [...] In the cold weather of 1905 one night the stop cock was left open the water in the pipe freezed the pipe burst and part of the water flowed into the store room of the' defendants and damaged their dry goods: It was ruled that the landlord was liable because it waS:his duly to keep the building and the pipes in a safe condition and he was responsible for the negligence of his tenants who occup [...] The question of the liability of a landlord to one tenant for the wrongs of other tenants is not fi:ée from difficulty and the balance of authority seems to be in favour of the view that where the defaulting tenant has exclusive control of the fixtures the landlord is not liable. [...] The point seems to be a novel one and the decision was rested on the ground that the conduct of the attorney amounted to impropriety inconsistent with the character and incompatible with the faithful discharge of the duties of his profession—so as to disentitle him to any assistance from the Court in the matter of recovery of his fees. [...] The question arose whether the clerk was a passeger within the meaning of the rule which entitles a passenger to recover damages against the Company resulting from the negligent act of the servants of the Company.