Posted On by &filed under Calcutta High Court, High Court.

Calcutta High Court
Poresh Nath Chatterjee vs Secretary Of State For India In … on 3 August, 1888
Equivalent citations: (1889) ILR 16 Cal 32
Author: P A Gordon
Bench: Pigot, Gordon


Pigot and Gordon, JJ.

1. As to the preliminary objection taken, we hold that an Additional Judge appointed to sit to hear cases under the Land Acquisition Act is a District Judge within the meaning of Section 39, and we think that, having regard to the provisions of Section 647, Code of Civil Procedure, an appeal lies to this Court.

2. As to the appeal itself, we think that there is no ground on which it can be sustained, and we therefore dismiss the appeal with costs to the respondent, who appears, other than the Secretary of State. We give no costs to the Secretary of State, who appeared, but stated that he had no interest in the matter.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

93 queries in 0.149 seconds.