SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1922 Supreme(Cal) 264

WALMSLE, PEARSON, ASUTOSH MOOKERJEE
Biman Chandra Dutta – Appellant
Versus
Promotho Nath Ghose and ok his Death His Heiress And Lrgal Representative, Srimati Mrinalini Dasi – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Asutosh Mookerjee, J. - This is an appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent from the judgment of tyro learned Judges of this Court who were equally divided in opinion in an appeal from an appellate decree preferred in a suit for recovery of money. The Court Of first instance decreed the suit. The District Judge reversed that decision and dismissed the suit. On second appeal to this court, Mr. Justine Tennon was of opinion that the decree of the Subordinate Judge should, be restored. Mr. Justice Newbould held, on the other hand, that the decree of the District Judge should be maintained. The result was that, under paragraph 1 of subsection (2) of Section 98 of the civil Procedure Code, the degree of the District Judge stood can-firmed.

2. The facts material for the decision of the question of law raised before us lie in a narrow Compass. One Jatindra Mohan Dutta died, leaving as his heir a Childless widow, Pranab Kumari Dasi. The widow sold her ornaments through her maternal untie, Pramatha Nath Ghose and made over the sale proceeds to him to be deposited on her behalf in the Hazaribagh Bank. The deposit was made on the 18th December 1909 and the account Was opened in the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top