High CourtsFull Bench(1924) 04 AHC CK 0061

Majju and Another vs Lachman Prasad and Another

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 25 April 1924 · Citation: AIR 1924 All 535 : 84 Ind. Cas. 702

HON’BLE JUDGES
Cecil Henry Walsh, Acting C.J. · Ryves, J · Dalal, J
RESULT
Dismissed

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

7 paragraphs · 208 words

Cecil Henry Walsh, Acting C.J.

1.

I should like to say that the matter of law raised by the appeal has been very fully argued by Mr. Haider in a very interesting discussion. I merely want to add my reason for constituting the Bench as I did in this case, because Mr. Haider raised a sort of indefinite protest against it. In this case, and 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. Haider''s interesting, argument.

Ryves, J.

2.

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

Dalai, J.

3.

I agree.

4.

By the Court. The order of the Court is that the appeal is dismissed with costs on the higher scale.