Log In
  • US
  • UK & Ireland
CaseMine Logo
Please enter at least 3 characters.
Parallel Search is an AI-driven legal research functionality that uses natural language understanding to find conceptually relevant case law, even without exact keyword matches.
Hi, I'm AMICUS. Your GPT powered virtual legal assistant. Let's chat.
  • Parallel Search NEW
  • CaseIQ
  • AMICUS (Powered by GPT)
  • Supreme Court
  • High Courts
    All High Courts
    Allahabad High Court
    Andhra Pradesh High Court
    Bombay High Court
    Calcutta High Court
    Chhattisgarh High Court
    Delhi High Court
    Gauhati High Court
    Gujarat High Court
    Himachal Pradesh High Court
    Jammu and Kashmir High Court
    Jharkhand High Court
    Karnataka High Court
    Kerala High Court
    Madhya Pradesh High Court
    Madras High Court
    Manipur High Court
    Meghalaya High Court
    Orissa High Court
    Patna High Court
    Punjab & Haryana High Court
    Rajasthan High Court
    Sikkim High Court
    Telangana High Court
    Tripura High Court
    Uttarakhand High Court
Log In Sign Up India Judgments
  • US
  • UK & Ireland

Alert

How is this helpful for me?

  • Creating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. Once you create your profile, you will be able to:
    1. Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your body of work.
    2. Interact directly with CaseMine users looking for advocates in your area of specialization.
  • Creating a unique profile web page containing interviews, posts, articles, as well as the cases you have appeared in, greatly enhances your digital presence on search engines such Google and Bing, resulting in increased client interest.
  • The cases linked on your profile facilitate Casemine's artificial intelligence engine in recommending you to potential clients who might be interested in availing your services for similar matters.

  Know more  

Create your profile now
  • Commentaries
  • Judgments
  • Acts

Calcutta High Court Case Commentaries

Establishing Strict Compliance in Property Transfer: Mathuramohan Saha v. Ram Kumar Saha

Establishing Strict Compliance in Property Transfer: Mathuramohan Saha v. Ram Kumar Saha

Date: Nov 25, 1915
Establishing Strict Compliance in Property Transfer: Mathuramohan Saha v. Ram Kumar Saha Introduction The case of Mathuramohan Saha v. Ram Kumar Saha adjudicated by the Calcutta High Court on...
Enhanced Widow's Right to Property Alienation for Religious Purposes: Insights from Khub Lal Singh v. Ajodhya Misser

Enhanced Widow's Right to Property Alienation for Religious Purposes: Insights from Khub Lal Singh v. Ajodhya Misser

Date: Aug 18, 1915
Enhanced Widow's Right to Property Alienation for Religious Purposes: Insights from Khub Lal Singh v. Ajodhya Misser Introduction The case of Khub Lal Singh v. Ajodhya Misser, adjudicated by the...
Calcutta High Court Establishes Continuous Right to Declare Title Without Limitation in Brojendra Kishore Roy Chowdhury v. Bharat Chandra Roy

Calcutta High Court Establishes Continuous Right to Declare Title Without Limitation in Brojendra Kishore Roy Chowdhury v. Bharat Chandra Roy

Date: Aug 3, 1915
Calcutta High Court Establishes Continuous Right to Declare Title Without Limitation in Brojendra Kishore Roy Chowdhury v. Bharat Chandra Roy Introduction The case of Brojendra Kishore Roy Chowdhury...
Intention to Formalize Agreements: Legal Principles in J.I.J. Hyam v. M.E. Gubbay

Intention to Formalize Agreements: Legal Principles in J.I.J. Hyam v. M.E. Gubbay

Date: May 26, 1915
Intention to Formalize Agreements: Legal Principles in J.I.J. Hyam v. M.E. Gubbay Introduction The case of J.I.J. Hyam v. M.E. Gubbay adjudicated by the Calcutta High Court on May 25, 1915, stands as...
Janakinath Hore v. Prabhasini Dasi: Establishing Tenant Rights in Execution Sales

Janakinath Hore v. Prabhasini Dasi: Establishing Tenant Rights in Execution Sales

Date: May 19, 1915
Janakinath Hore v. Prabhasini Dasi: Establishing Tenant Rights in Execution Sales Introduction Janakinath Hore v. Prabhasini Dasi is a landmark judgment delivered by the Calcutta High Court on May...
Reaffirming the Burden of Proof in Benamidar Property Claims: Jamahar Kumari Bibi v. Askaran Boid

Reaffirming the Burden of Proof in Benamidar Property Claims: Jamahar Kumari Bibi v. Askaran Boid

Date: Apr 29, 1915
Reaffirming the Burden of Proof in Benamidar Property Claims: Jamahar Kumari Bibi v. Askaran Boid Introduction Jamahar Kumari Bibi v. Askaran Boid is a landmark judgment delivered by the Calcutta...
Contracts to Influence Public Office Appointments Void under Public Policy – Ledu Coachman v. Hiralal Bose

Contracts to Influence Public Office Appointments Void under Public Policy – Ledu Coachman v. Hiralal Bose

Date: Apr 29, 1915
Contracts to Influence Public Office Appointments Void under Public Policy – Ledu Coachman v. Hiralal Bose (Calcutta High Court, 1915) Introduction The case of Ledu Coachman v. Hiralal Bose...
Revocation of Probate Due to Defective Proceedings: Syama Charan Baisya v. Prafulla Sundari Gupta

Revocation of Probate Due to Defective Proceedings: Syama Charan Baisya v. Prafulla Sundari Gupta

Date: Apr 27, 1915
Revocation of Probate Due to Defective Proceedings: Syama Charan Baisya v. Prafulla Sundari Gupta Introduction The case of Syama Charan Baisya Petitioner v. Prafulla Sundari Gupta Objector...
Amrita Lal Hazra v. Emperor: Clarifying Conspiracy Charge Requirements under IPC and Explosive Substances Act

Amrita Lal Hazra v. Emperor: Clarifying Conspiracy Charge Requirements under IPC and Explosive Substances Act

Date: Feb 26, 1915
Amrita Lal Hazra v. Emperor: Clarifying Conspiracy Charge Requirements under IPC and Explosive Substances Act Introduction Amrita Lal Hazra And Others v. Emperor, adjudicated by the Calcutta High...
Amrita Lal Hazra And Ors. v. Emperor (1915): Insights into Criminal Conspiracy and Evidence Admissibility

Amrita Lal Hazra And Ors. v. Emperor (1915): Insights into Criminal Conspiracy and Evidence Admissibility

Date: Feb 3, 1915
Amrita Lal Hazra And Ors. v. Emperor (1915): Insights into Criminal Conspiracy and Evidence Admissibility Introduction The case of Amrita Lal Hazra And Ors. v. Emperor was adjudicated by the Calcutta...
Establishing the Duty of Prosecution in Capital Cases: Insights from Ram Ranjan Ray v. King-Emperor

Establishing the Duty of Prosecution in Capital Cases: Insights from Ram Ranjan Ray v. King-Emperor

Date: Aug 5, 1914
Establishing the Duty of Prosecution in Capital Cases: Insights from Ram Ranjan Ray v. King-Emperor Introduction The case of Ram Ranjan Ray v. King-Emperor, adjudicated by the Calcutta High Court on...
Enforceability of Unregistered Lease Agreements: Hemanta Kumari Debi v. Midnapur Zemindari Co.

Enforceability of Unregistered Lease Agreements: Hemanta Kumari Debi v. Midnapur Zemindari Co.

Date: Jul 7, 1914
Enforceability of Unregistered Lease Agreements: Hemanta Kumari Debi v. Midnapur Zemindari Co. Introduction The case of Hemanta Kumari Debi v. Midnapur Zemindari Co. adjudicated by the Calcutta High...
Enforcement of Customary Transferability in Religious Mortgages: Mohamaya Debi v. Haridas Haldar

Enforcement of Customary Transferability in Religious Mortgages: Mohamaya Debi v. Haridas Haldar

Date: Jul 7, 1914
Enforcement of Customary Transferability in Religious Mortgages: Mohamaya Debi v. Haridas Haldar Introduction The case of Mohamaya Debi v. Haridas Haldar, adjudicated by the Calcutta High Court on...
Res Judicata and Limitation in Land Disputes: Insights from Mohendra Nath Biswas v. Shamsunnessa Khatum

Res Judicata and Limitation in Land Disputes: Insights from Mohendra Nath Biswas v. Shamsunnessa Khatum

Date: Jun 20, 1914
Res Judicata and Limitation in Land Disputes: Insights from Mohendra Nath Biswas v. Shamsunnessa Khatum Introduction The case of Mohendra Nath Biswas v. Shamsunnessa Khatum adjudicated by the...
Lucas v. Official Assignee of Bengal: Establishing Rigorous Standards for Proving Fraud in Insolvency Proceedings

Lucas v. Official Assignee of Bengal: Establishing Rigorous Standards for Proving Fraud in Insolvency Proceedings

Date: Jun 10, 1914
Lucas v. Official Assignee of Bengal: Establishing Rigorous Standards for Proving Fraud in Insolvency Proceedings Introduction The landmark case of J.M Lucas v. Official Assignee of Bengal,...
Execution of Money Decrees against Seva-Protected Property: Distinguishing Personal and Representative Capacities under Section 47 of the Civil Procedure Code

Execution of Money Decrees against Seva-Protected Property: Distinguishing Personal and Representative Capacities under Section 47 of the Civil Procedure Code

Date: Jun 6, 1914
Execution of Money Decrees against Seva-Protected Property: Distinguishing Personal and Representative Capacities under Section 47 of the Civil Procedure Code Introduction The case of Upendra Nath...
Wrongful Arrest of Vessels and the Necessity of Proving Malice: Madras Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. v. Shalimar Works Ltd.

Wrongful Arrest of Vessels and the Necessity of Proving Malice: Madras Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. v. Shalimar Works Ltd.

Date: May 3, 1914
Wrongful Arrest of Vessels and the Necessity of Proving Malice: Madras Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. v. Shalimar Works Ltd. Introduction The case of Madras Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. v. Shalimar Works...
Clarifying Rateable Distribution Under Section 73: Insights from Balmer Lawrie And Co. v. Jadunath Banerjee

Clarifying Rateable Distribution Under Section 73: Insights from Balmer Lawrie And Co. v. Jadunath Banerjee

Date: Apr 7, 1914
Clarifying Rateable Distribution Under Section 73: Insights from Balmer Lawrie And Co. v. Jadunath Banerjee Introduction Balmer Lawrie And Co. v. Jadunath Banerjee is a landmark judgment delivered by...
Clarifying Section 403: Double Jeopardy and Retrial in Emperor v. Nirmal Kanta Roy

Clarifying Section 403: Double Jeopardy and Retrial in Emperor v. Nirmal Kanta Roy

Date: Apr 2, 1914
Clarifying Section 403: Double Jeopardy and Retrial in Emperor v. Nirmal Kanta Roy Introduction The case of Emperor v. Nirmal Kanta Roy, adjudicated by the Calcutta High Court on April 1, 1914,...
Sanyasi Charan Mandal v. Asutosh Ghose: Affirming Infants Cannot Be Adjudged Insolvent in Partnership Proceedings

Sanyasi Charan Mandal v. Asutosh Ghose: Affirming Infants Cannot Be Adjudged Insolvent in Partnership Proceedings

Date: Mar 18, 1914
Sanyasi Charan Mandal v. Asutosh Ghose: Affirming Infants Cannot Be Adjudged Insolvent in Partnership Proceedings Introduction The case of Sanyasi Charan Mandal v. Asutosh Ghose, adjudicated by the...
Previous   Next
CaseMine Logo

Know us better!

  • Request a Demo
  • Watch Casemine overview Videos

Company

  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • Careers
  • Columns
  • Contact Us

Help

  • Pricing
  • Help & Support
  • Features
  • Workflow
  • Judgment Takedown Policy (India)
  • CaseMine API
  • CaseMine's Bespoke AI Solutions
  • Judge Signup
  • Student Signup

CaseMine Tools

  • CaseIQ
  • Judgment Search
  • Parallel Search
  • AttorneyIQ
  • Browse Cases
  • Acts

© 2023 Gauge Data Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Summary

Alert