BUCKLAND
Bhicumchand Chururia – Appellant
Versus
Deepchand Doogar – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Buckland, J. - The plaintiff sues to re-cover Rs. 10,000 for principal and interest under an instrument of hypothecation, dated 17th February 1930 and for other sums said to be due from the defendant Deepchand Doogar, which instrument was made between the plaintiff and the defendant Chimniram Halaschand of the one part and the defendant Deepohand Doogar of the other part. In addition to Deepchand Doogar and Chimniram Halaschand there are four other parties, Padamchand Pannalal, Matichand Fulchand, Ramkissen Jaikissen and Labhchand Rekubchand, who may briefly be described either as attaching creditors or as creditors who have instituted proceedings or obtained decrees against Deepchand Doogar. The only defendants who have appeared by counsel at the hearing are Padamchand Pannalal and Matichand Fulchand.
2. The short facts of the case are that Deepchand Doogar, the son of Indirchand, who is said to have been born on 28th January 1910 was carrying on a business in Calcutta known as the New East Bengal Store, by his uncle and attorney Chandanmull, to whom he had granted a power-of-attorney, dated 15th August 1929 under which Chandanmull executed the deed of hypothecation in suit
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.