High CourtsDivision Bench

Gopal Chunder Nath Coondoo and Others vs Haridas Chini and Another

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 26 February 1885 · Citation: (1885) ILR (Cal) 343

HON’BLE JUDGES
Pigot, J · O''Kinealy, J

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

2 paragraphs · 175 words

Pigot, J.—We think the appeal must succeed on the authority of the cases cited before us namely Gobind Pershad Talookdar v. Mohesh Chunder Surmah Ghuttack 23 W.E. 117 and In re Oodoy Churn Mitter ILR Cal. 411, the case mentioned in the note to that case, viz., Juggut Narain Singh v. The Collector of Manbhoom heard before the present Chief Justice, and the three unreported cases mentioned to us in which the same principle was adopted. The appellants, who are related to the great-grandfather, through the male line, are, for the reasons referred to in the judgment in Gobind Pershad Talookdar v. Mohesh Chunder Surmah Guttack 23 W.R. 117 entitled to the certificate here in preference to the respondents who claim through a succession of persons, one of whom was a female.

2.

The order of the lower Court must be reversed, and a certificate must be granted to the appellants. The Judge of the Court below must determine any question as to security as he may think fit. The appellants will have their costs.