High CourtsDivision Bench(1916) 06 CAL CK 0024

Ram Chandra Das and Others vs Hachunia Fakir alias Sachunia Fakir and Others

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 30 June 1916 · Citation: 35 Ind. Cas. 843

HON’BLE JUDGES
Newbould, J · D. Chatterjee, J

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

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

Loading membership options…

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

3 paragraphs · 158 words
1.

The order made in this case does not seem to be one which is authorised by the provisions of Order XXIII, Rule 1. There was no formal defect in the case and the learned Munsif ought to have respected the rule of this Court quoted by the petitioners in Hira Lal Mitra v. Uday Chandra Dey 14 Ind. Cas. 33 : 16 C.W.N. 1027 : 16 C.L.J. 103. There is no general jurisdiction given by the CPC for allowing a party to withdraw except under the provisions of the said Rule; nor do we find any reason why the learned Munsif did not grant any costs to the defendants.

2.

The order of the learned Munsif, therefore, allowing the plaintiff to withdraw is wrong. We set it aside and direct that the case, as against defendants Nos. 4 to 6, be tried in accordance with law.

3.

The Rule is made absolute with costs, one gold mohur.