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

1873 Supreme(Cal) 34

Bank of Hindustan, China and Japan – Appellant
Versus
Nundololl Sen – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Macpherson, J. - This suit having come on for settlement of issues, the matters in dispute between the parties have been argued, and it is agreed by Mr. Woodroffe and Mr. Evans, and is clear, that it is unnecessary to set the cause down for further hearing. I think that the suit will lie leave to sue in this Court was obtained when the plaint was filed, and therefore under the peculiar state of facts shown by the plaint, the suit will lie, though some of the properties which are the subject of it are situated in the mofussil.

2. But the suit being here, it is impossible that, in foreclosing the mortgages of the lands which lie out of Calcutta, I should follow the procedure prescribed by the Regulations for the foreclosure of mofussil mortgages. This Court has no means of carrying out a foreclosure under that procedure. At the same time (on the principles indicated in the case of Doed Chuttoo Sheick Jemadar v. Subbessur Sein 2 Boul., 151), I ought to see that the defendant is not by reason of the suit being brought in this Court deprived of any substantial advantage which he would have had if the suit had been instituted in a Court in the mofussil. For example, as the defenda

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