Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1890)ILR17Cal574
Wilson, J.1. Section 211, Indian Penal Code, enacts as follows:Whoever, with intent to cause injury to any person, institutes, or causes to be instituted, any criminal proceeding against that person, or falsely charges any person with having committed an offence, knowing that there is no just or lawful ground for such proceeding or charge against that person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both; and if such criminal proceeding be instituted on a false charge of an offence punishable with death, transportation for life, or imprisonment for seven years or upwards, shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.2. The question before us is whether the latter part of the section applies to cases in which complaint has been made to the Police of an offence falling within the description given, and into which the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1889)ILR16Cal149
Pigot and Rampini, JJ.1. The plaintiff sues as purchaser of the shares in certain property of Ahmed Hossein and Rohimunnessa, the son and daughter of one Umed Ali Ostagar, of whose estate the property in question formed part, and who died in the year 1879, leaving him surviving his widow Azru, Ahmed Hossein, Rohimunnessa, and Bunnijan, his children by Azru, and a son Palkjan, by a second wife. The defendants purchased the property, in which the plaintiff claims the shares of Ahmed and Rohimunnessa, at an execution sale, which took place on the 15th May 1882. The sale at which the defendant purchased this property was in execution of a decree in a mortgage suit brought by one Kalimuddin, the mortgagee, in 1881, and the decree in which was made in December 1881. The plaintiff says that the mortgage, to enforce which the suit of 1881 was brought, was ineffectual to pass any interest in the property, and that no interest in the property passed to the defendant under the sale on the 15th Ma...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1890)ILR17Cal380
W. Comer Petheram, C.J.1. This is a rule which has been obtained for the purpose of reviewing a decision of the Additional Judge of the 24-Pergunnahs, sitting for the purpose of ascertaining the amount of compensation to be paid for land which was required for public purposes.2. This was a piece of land belonging to the applicant here which was to be taken for some public purpose. In the first place it came before the Collector. The Collector for some reason referred the matter to the Judge, and then the proceedings had to be regulated by the law on the subject. But before I notice the law, I may as well state what the rest of the facts were. After the matter was referred to the Judge, an assessor was, as the law required, appointed on behalf of the claimant, and an assessor was also appointed on behalf of the Collector, the Collector representing the public body which wished to acquire the land, and a day was fixed for the hearing of the matter. When that day arrived, neither the asse...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1890)ILR17Cal196
Wilson, J.1. The present suit was brought by persons who claimed to be the landlords of the defendants, and they claimed to eject the defendants from the land in question on several grounds of which it is only necessary to notice the first.2. The first ground was that in a former suit between the same parties, in which the plaintiffs sued to recover rent, the defendants in their written statement had denied that the relation of landlord and tenant existed at all between the plaintiffs and themselves, and setup an adverse title claiming the land as their own lakhiraj. That was decided against the defendants, it being established that the relation of landlord and tenant did exist; and a decree for rent was given accordingly. In the present suit for ejectment the plaintiffs based their title in the first place upon the forfeiture of the defendants' interest, which they (the plaintiffs) say arose from the fact of the defendants having absolutely denied their landlords' title in the rent-su...
Tag this Judgment!