cover image: The Calcutta Law Journal. June 16  1913

Premium

20.500.12592/dk9vzs

The Calcutta Law Journal. June 16 1913

1913

The question was whether the Subordinate Judge had jurisdiction at the hearing of the appeal to revoke the order of the District Judge and dismiss the appeal on the ground of limitation. [...] The alleged cause of action being admitted to have arisen wholly outside the local limits of the ordinary original jurisdiction of the Court the question arose whether the Court had jurisdiction to try the suit on the ground that the defendant was a person " dwelling or carrying on business or personally working for gain " within the limits of Calcutta which was at the time of the institution o [...] On the nomination of the latter the predecessors of the defendants had been appointed iutwars in the said estate by the Collector of the District and afte‘ them the defendants themselves acted in that post. [...] On appeal to the High Court therefore the high Court sent back the cases "to be re-tried! on the materials which are before the Court." On the remand the Subordinate Judge first decided the question of notice holding that the notice was not necessary and in that-view sent the cases down to the Munsif for trial upon the merits. [...] [ Clause 11 provides that on breach of any of the conditions or on failure to perform any of the duties imposed on the cxecutant by the kabuliat it will be competent for the Collector with the sanction of the Board of Revenue to take the estate under Has management and pay the executant malikana ae provided in sections 3 and.5 of Regulation VII of 1822]."VOL.
law
Pages
13
Published in
India
SARF Document ID
sarf.120108
Segment Pages Author Actions
The Calcutta Law Journal. June 16 1913
65-77 unknown view

Related Topics

All