Kolkata Court August 1887 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.
Kutuhul Singh and ors. Vs. Uma Singh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-09-1887
Reported in: (1888)ILR15Cal31
ORDER1. This matter before us turns upon a rule granted on the 20th July, 1887, calling upon the party in whose favour an order under Section 145 was passed to show cause why the order of the Assistant Magistrate of the 23rd June, 1887, should not be set aside. The order was one made under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The dispute, upon the allegation of the existence of which the Magistrate took action arose, between classes of persons each of whom claimed to be possessed of land of which Tofuzul Hossein was the zemindar. The persons for whom Mr. M. Ghose and Mr. Gregory appear, to the number of 39 individuals, claim to be interested as tenants under that zemindar in the property with reference to which the order is made. The persons against whom the order has been made, and for whom Baboo Umbica Churn Bose appears, are Kutuhul Singh and others, being seventeen in number, persons claiming to be interested in various portions of land with reference to which the order i...
Basudeb Surma GossaIn and anr. Vs. Naziruddin
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-08-1887
Reported in: (1887)ILR14Cal834
1. Two persons were brought before the Extra Assistant Commissioner, a Magistrate of the first class at Tezpore, charged with criminal misappropriation of an elephant. They were discharged. The Magistrate, however, under Section 517 of the Criminal Procedure Code, ordered the elephant to be given to the Executive Engineer, During, holding that it was the property of Government, and the elephant has consequently been made over to that officer by the police. We are of opinion that the Magistrate was not competent to pass this order under Section 517 of the Criminal Procedure Code, because the elephant was not property produced before him regarding 'which any offence had been committed or which had been used for the commission of any offence,' the Magistrate having held that no offence was committed regarding this animal. We, therefore, set aside this order, although we are unable to give it any effect by ordering the restitution of the elephant. In this matter we follow the case of In re...
Nilmony Dassy for Self and as Guardian of Bishu Doshayi and anr. Vs. S ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-05-1887
Reported in: (1888)ILR15Cal17
1. The facts of this case appear to be these: One Gopal Dolai, the husband of the plaintiff No. 1 in this suit and the brother of the minor plaintiffs Nos. 2 and 3, had either in or previous to the year 1290 obtained an occupancy right in respect of certain paddy lands. The suit was brought by the plaintiffs for recovery of possession of these lands from the defendants Nos. 1 and 2 upon the establishment of the plaintiffs' title; and the title they claimed was that of an occupancy ryot. It appears that no rent had been paid by the plaintiffs or Gopal, their predecessor, for this land for some four or five years previous to the year 1290; and it was admitted by the plaintiffs that neither they nor their predecessor Gopal had cultivated the lands since the year 1290. There was no distinct finding by the lower appellate Court as to when the plaintiffs or their predecessor had ceased to cultivate the lands. Upon the facts, as was have stated them, the Subordinate Judge, upon the authority ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›