High CourtsFull Bench(1924) 04 AHC CK 0043

Lachman Prasad and Another vs Majju and Another

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 25 April 1924 · Citation: (1924) ILR (All) 671

HON’BLE JUDGES
Walsh, Acting C.J. · Ryves, J · Dalal, J

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 198 words

Ryves, J.—In my opinion the judgment of my learned brother was correct and I would dismiss the appeal.

Dalal, J.

2.

I agree.

Walsh, Acting C.J.

3.

I should like to say that the matter of law raised by the appeal has been very fully argued by Mr. Haidar in a very interesting discussion. I merely want to add my reason for constituting the Bench as I did in this case, because Mr. Haidar raised a sort of indefinite protest against it. In this case, and in the next one which we are about to hear, it seemed to me, when I happened to be acting as Chief. Justice and was looking into my duty as regards the constitution of the Bench, that these two cases were of a somewhat exceptional character, and that in this case, in particular, it was desirable, having regard to the Full Bench which has been referred to and the fact that I was a member of that Full Bench, to have a decision of three Judges. I remain of the same opinion after hearing Mr. Haidar''s interesting argument.

4.

The order of the Court is that the appeal is dismissed with costs.