Kolkata Court June 1876 Judgments
Manessur Dass and anr. Vs. the Collector and Municipal Commissioners o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-28-1876
Reported in: (1876)ILR1Cal410
Richard Garth, C.J.1. We think there is no ground for this appeal, and speaking for myself I should be very sorry to think that there existed any doubt whatever about this question.2. By the 26th section of Beng. Act III of 1864, the Municipal Commissioners are empowered to impose certain rates on houses, buildings and lands, which rates are to be paid by the owners, and by the 27th section those rates are to be assessed according to what may be considered the fair annual value of the property.3. When the valuation is completed, lists are to be made, showing the rates at which each property is assessed; and when the assessment is made for the first time or increased, a special notice is to be given to the owner and occupier, of the amount at which the property is assessed, and an appeal is then given against the assessment, which, by the terms of Section 33, is to be heard before not less than three of the Municipal Commissioners. If an appeal is not made against the assessment, the as...
Tag this Judgment!Desputty Singh (a Minor)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-28-1876
Reported in: (1877)ILR2Cal209
Kemp, J.1. On the 14th of July 1875, Baboo Desputty Singh, a minor, through the manager of his estates, Abdool Hye, applied to the District Judge for probate of the will of the late Bindessurree Pershad Singh, who it is alleged died at Arrah on the 31st of July, 1871, leaving properties, moveable and immoveable, situated in the district of Shahabad. To the petition, an instrument purporting to be the will of the deceased was annexed. Mr. J. H. Thornton, Civil Surgeon of Arrah, one of the subscribing witnesses to the said instrument, verified the petition, as laid down in Section 248, Act X of 1865.[1] Upon this petition an order was passed, directing 'advertisements to be made at the Collectorate and at the Civil Courts of the district. Notice also to be served on parties to suits before the Subordinate Judge, in which Desputty Singh was concerned. This application to come up on the first miscellaneous day after Mr. Palmer takes charge, say Saturday the 24th July.' This order was passe...
Tag this Judgment!Johurra Bibee Vs. Sreegopal Misser and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-19-1876
Reported in: (1876)ILR1Cal470
Pontifex, J.1. The plaintiff in this case is the widow of Monohur Lall, who died in the lifetime of his father Luehmeenarain Kuppoor Khettry. Luehmeenarain left a brother joint in estate, Hurrynarain Kuppoor Khettry, who subsequently became insolvent. The parties were and are governed by the Mitakshara law.2. The plaintiff' claims that, as the widow of Monohur Lall, she has a right to be maintained and supplied with money for the performance of her religious ceremonies out of the rents and profits of the house, No. 13 Roopchand Roy's Street, in Calcutta as property which belonged to the joint family, and that any interest which passed to the Official Assignee as representing Hurrynarain the surviving member of the joint family passed subject to such rights. A great many cases have been cited in support of the proposition, that a widow has what is called a lien for maintenance on the joint estate and particularly in a Mitakshara family. It is not necessary for me to give any opinion on ...
Tag this Judgment!Shona Malee Pat Mahadai Vs. Adhiranee NaraIn Coomary and
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-15-1876
Reported in: (1876)ILR1Cal365
L.S. Jackson, J.1. This special appeal was heard by the late Mr. Justice Mitter and myself. We took time to consider our judgment, and, shortly after, the illness of my lamented colleague, which continued for some months and was followed by his death, prevented our giving any joint decision, and the parties subsequently requested that I, as the surviving member of the Division Court, should give my judgment, which they agreed to treat as if it had been the judgment of both Judges. Public avocations have left me little leisure, and delay has occurred which I regret very much, but I have given the case my best consideration, and have now arrived at a conclusion. The facts were these: The plaintiff, Ranee Shona Malee, was the widow of one Ram Hurry, who in his lifetime was the Rajah of Killa Koojung. He had not been in the direct line of succession, but came in after the demise of his elder brother and of that brother's son. Rajah Ram Hurry, On his death was succeeded by the defendant No....
Tag this Judgment!The Queen Vs. Bholanath Sen
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-15-1876
Reported in: (1877)ILR2Cal23
Macpherson, J.1. This is an application to the High Court under Section 297 of the Criminal Procedure Code.2. The petitioner, Bholanath Sen, has been convicted by a Bench of Magistrates at Midnapore on two charges of breach of trust, under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code. He was sentenced to two periods of imprisonment, amounting, in all, to two years rigorous imprisonment, with a fine of Rs. 1,000 and in default of payment of the fine six months additional imprisonment.3. We are asked to quash the conviction on the ground of various substantial illegalities and irregularities, most of which are set forth in the petition presented to this Court.4. The seventh of the grounds stated in the petition is, that it was illegal and improper that a certain Mr. Larymore should have been one of the Bench of Magistrates who tried this case. It appears to us that this is a good ground of objection, and that, under the circumstances, the presence of Mr. Larymore, who had a substantial interest ...
Tag this Judgment!Ramdoyal Khan and ors. Vs. Ajoodhia Ram Khan and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1876
Reported in: (1877)ILR2Cal1
Markby, J.1. In this case the plaintiffs sue to recover, in istemrari maurasi right, possession of an extensive tract of country in Zilla Midnapore. The property is of very large value, and the appeal has been very fully and ably argued.2. It is necessary to state in what shape the appeal comes before us. The plaint is not at all in the form prescribed in Act VIII of 1859, but, as customary in the mofussil, is a plaint and written statement combined. The plaint was admitted, and the defendants having filed their written statements, the case then came on before the District Judge for settlement of issues. Upon that hearing the District Judge, without taking any evidence, dismissed the suit. Against this decision the plaintiffs appeal.3. One of the questions which was argued before the District Judge, and which he decided, was whether the plaint disclosed a cause of action. The District Judge held that it did disclose a cause of action. Against this there is no appeal. The District Judge...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Pursooram Borooah
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1876
Reported in: (1877)ILR2Cal118
Mitter, J.1. I am also of the same opinion. It seems to me that the effect of the Government Resolution, dated 1st of January 1873, was to confer upon Mr. Carnegy powers under Section 222 of the Criminal Procedure Code within the Subdivision of Jorehaut only. That being so, it cannot be said that he was 'transferred to an equal or higher office' of the nature of that which he held in the district of Seebsaugor; because, supposing he was transferred within the meaning of that Section and that he never vacated his appointment, the office to which he was transferred in the district of Kamroop is neither equal to nor higher than that he held in the district of Seebsaugor. A reference to Sections 27 and 28 of the Code[1] will show that the powers of a Magistrate of a division of a district are higher than those of a Magistrate of the first class not in charge of any subdivision. I am, therefore, of opinion that, under the Section (56) referred to above, Mr. Carnegy did not continue to exerc...
Tag this Judgment!Luchmi Dai Koori Vs. Asman Sing and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-07-1876
Reported in: (1877)ILR2Cal213
Markby, J.1. The Subordinate Judge took evidence in the case, but eventually without in any way going into the evidence held upon the strength of a decision of the Privy Council in the case of Muddun Thakoor v. Kantoo Lall 14 B.L.R. 187 that the decree under which the defendant purchased this property was conclusive in the matter, and that the defendant was not in any way bound to inquire further when this decree was existing.2. Against this judgment the plaintiff appeals, and he contends, in the first place, that the Privy Council case relied on does not make the decree conclusive in the way the Subordinate Judge has held it to be; secondly, he contends that upon the evidence he has made out his case that this was a debt for which his interest in the property could not in any way be made liable; and thirdly, he contends that, under the terms of the decree itself, the property which should have been first sold in satisfaction of the decree was the property which had been mortgaged, and...
Tag this Judgment!Debi Dutt Sahoo Vs. Subodra Bibee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-02-1876
Reported in: (1877)ILR2Cal284
Richard Garth, C.J.1. Without going at length, however, into the general question how far a minor is bound by a decree made against his guardian, during his minority, we think it clear that in this case the plaintiff was entitled to bring the fresh suit for the purpose of asserting his rights, and that, as against the present defendants, it was the only effectual remedy which he could pursue. If his object had merely been to reverse or alter the judgment in the former suit, it is possible that an application for a review would have answered his purpose. But the plaintiff's object was to unrip transactions which formed no part of the proceedings in the former suit, and as against Rameswar Dutt, who merely acted in that suit as the plaintiff's guardian, and as against Mr. Cosserat, who had nothing whatever to do with the former suit, it is obvious that any application for the review of the proceedings in that suit would have been utterly ineffectual, and that as against those persons the...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›