High CourtsDivision Bench

Beer Chunder Manikya vs Ishan Chunder Burdhun and Others

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 10 September 1883 · Citation: (1884) ILR (Cal) 136

HON’BLE JUDGES
Tottenham, J · McDonell, J
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

1 paragraphs · 119 words

McDonell, J.—We think that the Court below is wrong in holding that Section 432 of the CPC prevents the institution of a suit by the Maharajah in his own name, and through a recognized agent other than one appointed under that section. In the present suit the Maharajah has not sued as the independent Rajah of Hill Tipperah, but as Zamindar of Chakla Roshanabad, etc. The judgment to which the Subordinate Judge refers was a suit which was brought against the Maharajah qua Maharajah of Independent Tipperah, in respect of a subject of which our Courts could not take cognizance. The order of the lower Court is therefore reversed, and the suit will be tried by the Subordinate Judge.