Skip to Content

Colonial Cases

Minor cases India

The Bombay Times, 15 July 1840

BENGAL.

HURKARU, June 29.

FORGERY. - Thomas Manson, against whom a case of forgery on the house of McKenzie, Lyall and Co. was not long ago discovered, which case is yet to be sent up to the Supreme Court, has, it appears, been committing forgery in more than one-quarter.  It has just been brought to the notice of the police, that he has played the same trick on the house of Messrs. Cockerell and Co.  He succeeded in passing off a forged document, purporting to be a draft, drawn by Mr. Clark, the well known Indigo Planter of Bhungowangloah, for the sum of two hundred rupees, on the house of Cockerell and Co., and in favour of himself.  The forgery has recently been discovered by Mr. Clark himself, to whom the draft had been sent in the course of accounts.

 

The Times, 4 December, 1846
JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL.
(Present, - Lord Brougham, Lord Langdale, Mr. Pemberton Leigh, Dr. Lushington, with Sir E. H. East and Sir E. Ryan as assessors.)
MUMMI RAM AWASTY v. SHEO HUGHN AWASTY.
In the course of this suit, which was commenced in January, 1815, in the Provincial Court of Patna, in India, the appellant had entered into a compromise upon an agreement that he should do what amounts to the same thing as entering satisfaction on the record in the courts of this Country in consideration of a payment of 2,000 rupees. This step, however, the appellant had afterwards refused to take, and now came asking to have various decisions of the courts in India set aside, by which he had been called upon to enter satisfaction before payment of the money.
  Lord Langdale, after describing the various steps by which this case had travelled through a series of courts in India, dismissed the appeal, observing that the plaintiff merely demanded to be exempt from what was unpleasant to him to do, and upon doing which there was no ground to think that the money would not be paid over to him. The question of costs was reserved, in order that the Court might have time to look into the precedents on the question, whether the appellant, having been admitted to sue in forma pauperis, in the courts below, could claim the benefit of such admission in the court of appeal without an order to that effect from the latter court.
  Mr. L. Wigram, Queen's Counsel, and Mr. Moore, appeared for the appellant; Mr. C. Buller, Queen's Counsel, Mr. Jackson, and Mr. Forsyth, for the respondent.
  The case was set down for hearing in this court on the 16th of March last.

Published by Centre for Comparative Law, History and Governance at Macquarie Law School