Research › Browse › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

1915 DIGILAW 266 (CAL)

Baijnath Mistri v. Raja Jung Bahadur

1915-07-02

ASUTOSH MOOKERJEE, LAWRENCE JENKINS, RICHARDSON

body1915
JUDGMENT 1. Though we have heard Mr. Sen and listened to an interesting and careful argument, we certainly do not mean to hold that he was entitled to be heard and that an appeal lies. But it is enough for us to say that notwithstanding what he urged, it is clear that there was no case for revision u/s 115 of the Code. 2. We must, therefore, dismiss the appeal with costs. 3. We assess the hearing fee at one gold mohur.