GOPAL CHANDRA CHAUDHURI Vs. RAJANIKANTA GHOSH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE judgment, after a full consideration of the evidence, stated their Lordships' grounds for disagreeing with the finding of the High Court, and concluded as follows:

(2.) THEIR Lordships cannot leave this case without making an observation of a nature which unfortunately this Board has had to make before, but seldom with such insistence as in the present case. The printed record contains 2187 pages, besides about 100 pages of supplementary appendix; 368 of these pages are taken up in setting out the items of a measurement "chitta" of the property in the possession of the defendants in 1852. Their Lordships appreciate the importance of this document as supporting the possession by the defendants at that date of the property in dispute, but a few pages would have given all the materials necessary.

(3.) IT was the appellants' duty to print the record. It is due to their default in the exercise of a discriminating judgment that so much unnecessary matter was wastefully printed, and as a lesson to their advisers and all other practitioners, their Lordships propose that the Registrar of the High Court at Calcutta should disallow the actual costs of printing the record from page 1442 to page 1664, both inclusive, and from page 1690 to page 1797. both inclusive, and such consequential costs as he may think light in proportion, and that the costs to be taxed in England should also be reduced by such amount as the Registrar of the Privy Council may consider is attributable to the insertion of this superfluous matter.