Kolkata Court May 1883 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Michael Vs. Ameena Bibi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-07-1883
Reported in: (1883)ILR9Cal733
Norris, J.1. This is a mortgage suit. The plaint states that on 8th January 1881 the defendant No. 1 mortgaged certain premises to the plaintiff to secure the repayment of Rs. 12,000 with interest.2. By an indenture of 21st January 1882 the defendant No. 1 conveyed the mortgaged premises, subject to the mortgage, to defendants Nos. 2 and 3 upon trust for certain charitable purposes.3. The prayer of the plaint is 'that an account may be taken of what is due to the plaintiff for principal and interest on the security of the said indenture of mortgage of 8th January 1881, and that in default of payment of the amount to be found due, and of the plaintiff's costs of this suit by a short day to be appointed by the Court in that behalf, the defendants may be absolutely foreclosed of all equity of redemption of and in the said mortgaged premises or otherwise that the same may be sold under the direction of this Honorable Court.'4. A question arises as to the sufficiency of the service of the s...
Shadulla Howladar and anr. Vs. the Empress
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-07-1883
Reported in: (1883)ILR9Cal875
Prinsep, J.1. After considering the evidence on the record in this case, we are of opinion that the appellants have been rightly convicted under Sections 149 and 304 of the Indian Penal Code. It is clear that they were the ringleaders in a premeditated riot, with the knowledge and intention necessary to bring them within these sections. The mob, of which the appellants were the ringleaders, consisted of about one hundred and twenty-five men, said to have been armed with shields, spears, and clubs. One man was killed, and others were injured.2. On these facts we hold that the appellants have been properly convicted, and we also think that the sentences passed on them are not too severe. The appeals are, therefore, dismissed.3. It is necessary, however, to make some observations on the procedure adopted by the Sessions Judge. He has taken advantage of the terms of Section 309 of the present Code to sum up the evidence for the prosecution and defence to the assessors. This provision has, ...
Rookminy Bullub Roy Vs. Mulk Jamania Begum
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-07-1883
Reported in: (1883)ILR9Cal915
Richard Garth, C.J.1. This suit was brought by the plaintiff, a zamindar, against the wife of the Nawab Nazim of Bengal, for rent of a patni for the year 1284 and part of the year 1285.2. The defendant holds the patni under a grant from the Nawab Nazim, and for the purposes of this suit is in the same position as the Nawab himself would be.3. The question between the parties turned out to be a matter of account; and in determining that question one point, which was raised by the plaintiff' was, that certain sums, which were admittedly paid by the defendant to the Government for revenue in the year 1284, and which the plaintiff ought to have paid himself, ought to be considered (as payment made by the defendant to the plaintiff), and as such might be appropriated by the plaintiff in discharge of the rent of the year 1283, which otherwise was barred by limitation. The plaintiff in this suit did not claim any rent for the year 1283.4. The Subordinate Judge was of opinion that the plaintif...
Sheo Saran Tato Vs. the Empress
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-04-1883
Reported in: (1883)ILR9Cal877
Prinsep, J.1. There is no reason for questioning the correctness of the conviction of the appellant, and the sentence is not excessive. The appeal is, therefore, rejected.2. We think it necessary, however, to notice a misconception of the object of Section 75, Penal Code, into which the Sessions Judge has fallen. He seems to think that on a second conviction of any of the offences specified in that section he is bound to pass sentence thereunder, and he accordingly observes that, although for the offence committed (Section 457), the prisoner would be liable to imprisonment for fourteen years, he would under Section 75 of the Penal Code, by reason of a previous conviction, be liable to imprisonment for only ten years. He then states that 'it is for the prisoner's advantage, provided he is prepared to take his chance of transportation to admit a previous conviction.' The object of Section 75 is to provide for an additional sentence, not for a less severe sentence on a second conviction. ...
Kajo and ors. Vs. Fuseehun
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-03-1883
Reported in: (1884)ILR10Cal15
Mitter, J.1. This case was once before this Court, and was remanded to be retried with reference to the observations made in the remand judgment.2. The proceeding in the lower Court was commenced by a suit under the provisions of Act IX of 1861 brought by Mussamut Kajo, the mother of Fuseehun, claiming the custody of her four grandchildren, i.e., the children of Fuseehun. One of these children is a boy, and the other three are girls. They are all admittedly under age.3. The District Judge finds that the boy is over seven years of age, and the eldest girl, Beebee Sulima, is nearly twelve years old, and has arrived at puberty in the sense in which that term is used in the Mahomedan law.4. There was a counter-application made by Abu Saleh and Abu Mahomed, their uncles, and Mussamut Sobi, their father's mother, in which they opposed Mussamut Kajo's claim, and set up their right to the guardianship of these minor children.5. The Judge has found that the other two girls, viz., Surah and Habi...
Abdool HosseIn Vs. Lall Chand Mohtan Dass
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-03-1883
Reported in: (1884)ILR10Cal36
Mitter, J.1. The question in this appeal is, whether a part proprietor of an estate is competent under Section 38 of Beng. Act VIII of 1869 to apply for measurement of its lands after making the remaining proprietors parties to the proceeding. The plaintiff in this case had a fractional share in a certain estate. He applied for measurement of its lands under the aforesaid section, making his co-sharers defendants, alleging that they had colluded with the tenants. His application was allowed by the Collector. On appeal, the District Judge, relying upon a ruling of this Court, in Baba Chowdry v. Abedooddeen Mahomed I.L.R. 7 Cal. 69 has reversed the order of the lower Court, holding that it had no jurisdiction to order a measurement on the application of a fractional owner of an estate.2. It is contended before us that the ruling quoted is not applicable, inasmuch as it is not clear from it that all the proprietors were made parties in that ease.3. It seems to us that this contention is w...
Empress Vs. Ishan Chundra De and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-02-1883
Reported in: (1883)ILR9Cal847
Prinsep, J.1. The second defendant must clearly be acquitted on the authority of the judgment of this Court in the case of Empress v. Kola Lalang I.L.R. 8 Cal. 214 in which we concur.2. The first defendant has in our opinion been properly convicted whether under Section 60 or Section 53 is immaterial-see Queen v. Ishan Chunder Shaha 19 W.R. Cr. 34; Empress v. Baney Madhub Shaw I.L.R. 8 Cal. 207 : 10 C.L.R. 389. We would farther observe that for reasons stated by the Sessions Judge himself, he need not have referred the case of this prisoner. A necessity for altering a conviction from one section to another for cognate offences when the accused has not been prejudiced by any such error is no sufficient ground for a reference to the Court of Revision....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›