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

1935 Supreme(Cal) 316

HENDERSON
Bhupati Mohan Das – Appellant
Versus
Phanindra Chandra Chakravarty – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. This appeal arises out of a suit for a declaration that the plaintiff is the assignee from defendant 2 of a sum of money specified in the schedule attached to the plaint and as such is entitled to get the said sum from defendant 1 who realised the same in execution of a decree obtained by him against defendant 2. The plaintiff's case briefly stated is as follows:

2. Defendant 2, formerly a reader of English literature of the Dacca University, borrowed Rs. 4,200 on a hand-note from the plaintiff on 11th April 1926. On the same day by way of collateral security he assigned to the plaintiff his right, title and interest in his 20 years endowment policy No. 533114 for Rupees 5,000 with the Sun Life Assurance of Canada and in the provident fund money under the University of Dacca accrued and to be accrued thereafter until the debt on the hand-note would be fully liquidated. Under Clause 2, Section 2, Dacca University Act, the Governor-General in Council extended the provisions of the Provident Fund Act in 1925 by Notification No. 844 of 19th April 1927 to the provident fund constituted by the Dacca University. Defendant 1 obtained a simple money decree against defendant 2 on 1

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