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

1934 Supreme(Cal) 301

LORD-WILLIAMS, COSTELLO, BUCKLAND
Shailabala Dasee – Appellant
Versus
Gobardhandas Ladsaria – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Costello, J. - In this appeal from a judgment of Buckland, J., dated 24th January 1934, a point of considerable importance arises. The learned Judge himself said:

In this case a preliminary point of considerable importance has been raised, on behalf of the defendant, by the learned Advocate-General.

2. The suit was brought to recover a sum of Rs. 50,000 or such damages as the Court might allow, for breach of a covenant contained in a lease, whereby the defendant covenanted to return the property demised by the lease in good order and condition. It appears that a suit, which admittedly was precisely the same as the present suit (the previous suit being numbered 1771 of 1928) was instituted by the same plaintiff against the same defendant and on the same cause of action; that is to say, Shailabala Dasee was the plaintiff in Suit No 1771 of 1928 and she is the plaintiff in the present suit, and Gobardhandas Ladsaria was the defendant in Suit No 1771 of 1928, and he is defendant in the present suit. On 22nd May 1930 Suit No. 1771 of 1928 was dismissed by an order of Lort-Williams, J., under the provisions of Ch. 10, Rule 36 of the Rules of this Court. There was no appeal from th

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