Page

STATUTE 29 CAR. II, c. 3, s. 4 See STATUTE OF FRAUDS.

11 & 12 VICT., c. 21, s. 73—Act VIII of 1859, s. 342--
Appeal from Commissioner of Insolvent Court.] Section 342 of
Act VIII of 1859 does not apply to appeals from the orders of a
Judge sitting as a Commissioner of the Insolvent Court. The
right of appeal is given by section 73 of the Indian Insolvent Act,
and the Court cannot impose on the appellant a condition that he
shall give security for the costs of such an appeal.

IN THE MATTER OF RAMSEBAK MISSER

20 & 21 VICT., c. 160

See AGENT.

24 & 25 VICT., c. 104, s. 15—Jurisdiction-Power of the
High Court-Review.] The lower Appellate Court admitted a
petition for review of its judgment after a lapse of ninety days
from the date of the decision, without recording that just and
reasonable cause for the delay had been shown.

On an application, under section 15 of the Charter Act, to the
High Court to set aside the order of the lower Court, on the ground
that that Court had no jurisdiction to entertain an application for
review after a lapse of ninety days, without recording that there
was just and reasonable cause for the delay, the High Court refused
to interfere.

ASRAFANNISSA BAGUM v. SYAD INAET HOSSEIN

Power of the High Court
-Review of Order refusing Petition to sue in Formâ Pauperis.]
A Court of original jurisdiction has power to entertain an appli-
cation to review an order refusing a petition for leave to sue in
formâ pauperis.

Under section 15 of 24 & 25 Vict., c. 104, the High Court set
aside an order of a Court of original jurisdiction refusing to enter-
tain such an application on the ground that the Court had not
jurisdiction to entertain it.

IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF RANI UMASUNDARI

179

195

316

App. 29

...

-29 Car. 11., c. 3, s. 4—21 Geo. III.,

c. 70, s. 17-Hindu Defendant.] The 4th section of the Statute
of Frauds does not apply to suits in which the defendant is a
Hindu.

NEKRAM JEMADAR v. ISWARIPRASAD PACHURI

STIPULATED PERIOD

See BENAMI PURCHASE IN CHILD'S NAME.

App.

45

See CRIMINAL PROcedure Code, s. 36.
SUBSISTENCE-MONEY-Discharge-Act VIII of 1859, ss. 276,
278.] A prisoner was arrested on August 4th, and committed to
prison on the evening of the same day. Before his committal, the
execution-creditor paid into the hands of the jailor a sum sufficient
for his subsistence-money for 27 days, at the established rate of 4
annas per day. On the 5th August, a writ of habeas corpus was
applied for to bring the prisoner up; and on the 6th, a further sum
of 4 annas was paid to the jailor to cover any deficiency in the
former payment.

Held, that the requirements of section 276, Act VIII of 1859,
had not been fulfilled, and that the prisoner was entitled to his dis-
charge under section 278.

App.

79

On the 30th of September, the plaintiff, a detaining creditor, paid
to the jailor of the Calcutta jail subsistence-money for 30 days for a
prisoner confined at the suit of the plaintiff, the jailor then having
a balance of 4 annas over from the subsistence-money for Septem-
ber. Held, a sufficient compliance with section 276 of Act VIII
of 1859.

...

App. 80

HALADHAR DEY v. AMBIKA CHARAN BOSE ...
SUCCESSION OF GENTILES ACCORDING TO MITAKSHARA 293
See HINDU LAW.

DECLARATION OF TRUSTS OF A TEMPLE-
Act XX of 1863.] In bringing a suit under Act XX of 1863, it is
not necessary to show that the temple was one which was formerly
under control of the Board of Revenue. The Act applies to pro-
perty in Calcutta.

GANES SING v. RAMGOPAL SING

SUIT FOR ENHANCEMENT OF RENT

See PETITION OF APPEAL UNDER s. 15, LETTERS PATENT.

POSSESSION OF LAND...

See ACT III of 1864 (B. C.), s. 87.

See PARDANASHIN.

Page

47

App.

50

TO CLOSE WINDOWS

162

433

463

USER, RIGHT OF-Enjoyment, Period of, sufficient to create a Right
of User.] There is no rule of law that a certain period of enjoy-
ment is required to establish the right of user.
MULLICK KUrim Baksh v. HARIHAR MANDAR

USURY

...

174

500

...

VALUATION OF SUIT-Act XXVI of 1867, Schedule B, Article
11, Note A-Act XVI of 1868, s. 16.] On a dispute arising as to
the proper valuation of a suit, the Court may, on the application of
either party, issue a commission, and make an enquiry into the
market value, or the net profits of the property in dispute. The
final decision as to the proper valuation is vested in the Court which
hears the suit.

When the defendant asserts that a suit is over-valued, the onus
of proving the truth of his assertion lies on him.

UMA SANKAR ROY CHOWDHRY v. SYAD MANSUR ALI KHAN
BAHADUR...

...

...

App.

6

Appeal.] When a suit has been admitted

upon a certain stamp, tried and decreed for the plaintiff, "under
valuation" is no ground for dismissing the defendant's appeal.
EMAUDDIN KHAN V. RAMKISHOR KOWAR

Jurisdiction-Appellate Court.]

App.

30

When

it appears, on appeal, that the suit has not been rightly valued,
and, if rightly valued, the Court of first instance would not have
had jurisdiction to try it, the Appellate Court may entertain the
objection, though it had not been raised in the Court below.
SHEO GOBIND RAWUT v. ABHAI NARAYAN SING

VALUE OF DECREE

IN POSSESSION OF ESTATE AS SECURITY FOR
DOWER, FORM OF DECREE AGAINST ...

See PRACTICE.

...

570

WILL-Domicile-Rules for Interpretation-" Children”—Accretions
to Property from Rents.] Where a testator has an ascertained
domicile, the construction of his will must depend on the law of
that domicile; but if no particular law is applicable, the will is to
be interpreted by principles of natural justice.

In such cases, in applying the rules of Hindu, Mahomedan, or
English law to the wills of Hindus, Mahomedans, or East Indian
Christians, respectively, their particular habits and modes of life
may be looked to as a guide to the interpretation.

From the context of the will and surrounding circumstances,
"children" may be interpreted as illegitimate children.

Where by will the income of estates was left to devisees for life,
with a gift over of the corpus on their death, and a portion of the
income instead of being divided among the tenants-for-life was ap-
plied to the purchase of other estates, held, these estates did not
pass to the remaindermen, but formed the absolute property of the
tenants-for-life, and passed to their devisees.

MUSSAMAT FANNY BARLOW v. SOPHIA Eveline Orde

...

Void Bequest-Uncertainty-Superstitious Uses.] N. E. J.,
a Hebrew merchant, domiciled in Calcutta, and possessed of both
real and personal property, died, leaving a will, by which, after ap-
pointing his mother, K. E. J., and his brother, J. E. J., executrix
and executor thereof, and making various bequests and provisions,
he made the following bequest of the residue of the property :-
“And what may remain after payment of the above-mentioned
"sums, as well as the debts, shall remain under the control of my
"brothers, S. E. J. and J. E. J., for the purpose of defraying there-
"with the expenses for the year, and making charitable distributions
"as commanded, and giving alms for my spiritual benefit according
"to their judgment." Held, assuming that the High Court should
act in conformity with the English Court of Chancery in carrying
out charitable bequests, that as far as the bequest related to giving
of alms for the testator's spiritual benefit, it was void for uncertain-
ty. The "defraying expenses and making charitable distribution"
were limited by the bequest to the year within which the testator
died.

1