Kolkata Court June 1892 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.
Mukunda Lal Pal Chowdhry and anr. Vs. I. Lehuraux and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-24-1892
Reported in: (1893)ILR20Cal379
Norris and Beverley, JJ.1. This is a suit for partition.2. The plaintiffs are the proprietors of a 12-anna share in a certain tenure known as taluk Banga Chandra Das, and they allege that they are in possession of the other 4 annas of the tenure as durtalukdars; but it does not appear upon the proceedings, so far as we are aware, to whom the plaintiffs pay rent on account of the 4-anna share of the taluk.3. The taluk in question consists of a 71/2 annas or a 15/32 part of the rents of so much of the lands of the three villages, Deora, Bagmara and Talagao as appertain to the estate No. 23 on the tauzi of the Collectorate of Noakhali. It appears that estates Nos. 23, 24, 25 and 26 represent fractional shares in three parganas comprising some 500 villages. No butwara has been made of these parganas, but by some private arrangement, apparently, certain lands in a village have been assigned to one estate and certain other lands to another, some lands being kept common to all the four estate...
In Re: Shoshee Bhusan Bannerjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-17-1892
Reported in: (1892)ILR19Cal582
Trevelyan, J.1. Yesterday an application was made to me for probate of a will. The applicant was not named as executrix. It was contended before me that as universal legatee she was executrix according to the tenor of the will, and in support of that argument the decision in the case of In the goods of Radhika Mohan Sett 7 B.L.R., 563 was cited. Although I desire to speak with every respect for the learned Judge who passed the order in that case, still I am unable to follow that decision. That decision, if it were right at the time, is inconsistent with the intention of the Legislature as shown by Section 19 of the Probate and Administration Act. Under this Act a universal or residuary legatee is entitled to letters of administration with the will annexed. I must take it that by that expression the Legislature intended that they are to be excluded from probate. The decision in the case of In the goods of Radhika Mohan Sett 7 B.L.R., 563, as far as 1 can find, has never been followed. M...
Bir NaraIn Panda and ors. Vs. Darpa NaraIn Prodhan and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-17-1892
Reported in: (1893)ILR20Cal74
Prinsep and Banerjee, JJ.1. The only question raised in this case is whether execution is barred with reference to the instalments that fell due within three years before the date of the last application for execution. The decree, which was based upon a compromise, directs payment by instalments, with a proviso that it default is made in the payment of any instalment, then, without waiting for default in other instalments, the plaintiff shall be competent to take out execution and realise the whole amount of the kistbundi together with interest. In the application for execution the decree-holder alleged that since 1295 the judgment-debtors had made default in the payment of the instalments, and that consequently the remaining instalments had all become recoverable, and he accordingly asked for execution of the whole decree after deducting the sums alleged to have been paid. The judgment-debtors pleaded limitation and denied the payments said to have been made in 1293 and 1294. The Cour...
Jukni Alias Parbati Vs. Queen-empress
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-07-1892
Reported in: (1892)ILR19Cal627
O'Kinealy and Ameer Ali, JJ.1. This is an appeal from the decision of the Additional Sessions Judge of Murshidabad, convicting Jukni of an offence under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentencing her to three months' rigorous imprisonment.2. The case is hardly distinguishable in any point from the case of In re Mussamut Channa 7 C.L.R., 354. The defence in that case, as in this case was, that by the custom of the caste sagai marriage or nikka, which generally means a second marriage, was admissible, and that the husband had relinquished the wife.3. In this case the Judge was of opinion that the husband had not relinquished the wife. One assessor was of a different opinion, and the second assessor, without referring to the question of relinquishment at all, was of opinion that the custom of nikka marriages prevailed in the caste.4. We think there is a large mass of evidence, some of it unrebutted in any way, to show that such a custom does exist. We agree with the assessor who...
Mahabir Pershad Singh and ors. Vs. Hurrihur Pershad NaraIn Singh and o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-02-1892
Reported in: (1892)ILR19Cal629
Prinsep and Ameer Ali, JJ.1. Durbijoy Singh was a member of joint Hindu family under Mitakshara law with the predecessors of the first party defendants, but it was held by a competent Court that he had separated from them. He died in January 1849, leaving two widows, Sulagan and Maheshwar. Sulagan died in 1850 leaving daughters, and Maheshwar died childless in 1886. The plaintiff's are the natural heirs to Durbijoy, plaintiffs 1 and 2 being sons of daughters of Sulagan and plaintiff's 3 and 4 sons of a son of a third daughter. As heirs to Durbijoy after the death of his last surviving widow they sue to recover his estate, some of which has been alienated to the second party defendants.2. The defendants rely on an ikrarnama or will, alleged to have been executed by Durbijoy on the 13th Assin 1255 (7th October 1847), under which, in the event of his leaving no son, he gave Sulagan a life estate in a certain property, Roop Narainpur, and gave his other wife, Maheshwar, his remaining estat...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›