The Calcutta Law Journal. January 16 1913

The stamp used for the plaint in the City Civil Court was cancelled under section 3o of the Court-fees Act and the plaint was re-presented to the Presidency Small Cause Court with the cancelled stamp and an additional stamp to make up the deficiency in the Court-fee required for the plaint in that Court under section 75 of the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act. [...] The learned Chief Judge of the Presidency Small Cause Court being of opinion that the cancelled stamp could not be used again in payment of the Court-fee chargeable on the plaint made as reference to the High Court. [...] If on the other hand the person transfers a part of his interest while still in possession the transferee will not be affected by the subsequent possession of a third party unless under his transfer the transferee is entitled to possession of the property. [...] The decision of the House of Lords in this case (reversing that of the Court of Appeal) establishes the proposition that a principal is Table for the fraud of his agent whether the fraud is committed for the benefit of the principal or for the benefit of the firm. [...] The only difference said his Lordship (and the other Law Lords all concurred with him) between the case where the principal receives the benefit of the fraud and the case where he does not is that in the latter case the principal is liable for the wrong done to the person defiauded by his agent acting within the scope of his agency ; in the former case he is liable.