Research › Browse › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

1916 DIGILAW 4 (CAL)

Nabadip Chandra Nandi v. Secretary of State for India in Council

1916-01-03

HERBERT HOLMWOOD, IMAM

body1916
JUDGMENT 1. We are of opinion that this Rule must be made absolute on the ground on which it was issued. In the first place, there was no summons upon any body to produce the documents and, therefore, Order XVI, Rule 10, did not apply, and secondly, if Order XVI, Rule 10, did apply, the procedure laid down in that rule was not followed, and until it was followed, no order under Rule 12 could possibly be made. The Civil Courts, and particularly the peripatetic Settlement Courts which cause a large amount of disturbance to local interests, cannot be too careful to follow the provisions of law strictly as regards summoning persons and documents before them. It appears to us that the proceedings of the Assistant Settlement Officer and the Settlement Officer affirming them were wholly without jurisdiction and must be set aside; and if the Assistant Settlement Officer requires any documents from the petitioners he must proceed strictly in accordance with law. 2. The Rule is made absolute with costs to the petitioners, two gold mohurs. The fine, if paid, must be refunded.