Kolkata Court December 1895 Judgments
Queen-empress (on the Prosecution of Kunjo Pramanick) Vs. Sri Churn Ch ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-20-1895
Reported in: (1895)ILR22Cal1017
W. Comer Petheram, C.J.1. I am of opinion that the accused was rightly convicted, and that there is no reason for the interference of the Court in this case.2. A comparison of the judgment in the case of Prosonna Kumar Patra v. Udoy Sant (ante, p. 669) with the whole of the definitions contained in Section 23 of the Penal Code, will shew that no effect has been given in that judgment to the last two paragraphs of the section.3. The judgment proceeds on the assumption that when the words in the definition are read into Section 378 of the Penal Code in place of the words 'dishonestly,' the section will read 'whoever, with the intention of gaining by unlawful means property to which he is not legally entitled, moves that property, is said to commit theft.' It is evident that in making such an assumption the last two paragraphs of Section 23 have been left out of consideration, and if they as well as the first paragraph are read into Section 378 it will read as follows: 'Whoever in order t...
Tag this Judgment!Amir DulhIn Alias Mahamdijan Vs. Administrator-general of Bengal and o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-19-1895
Reported in: (1896)ILR23Cal351
Prinsep and Banerjee, JJ.1. The appellant asks us to reverse the order of the lower Court confirming the sale of Tengrahi and Rajapokur, and to set aside the sale, on the ground that there were material irregularities in the conduct of the sale which have led to substantial injury to her.2. The irregularities complained of are two : (1) the improper postponement of the sale of Sankarsa which had been advertised for sale as lot No. 1 and which should have been sold first; and (2) the non-service of the proclamation of sale in the mofussil; and it is contended that the first-mentioned irregularity has caused substantial injury to the appellant, because if the sale of San-karsahad taken place as advertised, it would have realised enough to satisfy the decree and to render the sale of the appellant's properties wholly unnecessary; and the second irregularity is said to have caused injury, because if the sale proclamation had been duly published, there would have been more bidders, and the ...
Tag this Judgment!Misri Lal Vs. Lachmi NaraIn Bajpie
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-16-1895
Reported in: (1896)ILR23Cal350
Trevelyan and Beverley, JJ.1. In this case the learned pleader for the petitioner does not appear in-support of the rule. The rule was granted on the authority of the decision of Mr. Justice Brodhurst in Queen-Empress v. Sukha I.L.R. 8 All. 14, in which he holds that the Appellate Court, acting under Section 423 of the Criminal Procedure Code, can only direct a committal in cases exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions. There is a contrary decision by two learned Judges of the Bombay High Court in the case of Queen-Empress v. Abdul Rahiman I.L.R. 16 Bom. 580 differing from Mr. Justice Brodhurst's decision. We prefer the Bombay authority, and we are of opinion that the words of the section are quite wide enough to warrant the Magistrate in doing what he has done here, and that the section is not limited to cases exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions. We, therefore, discharge the rule....
Tag this Judgment!In Re: an Agreement Between the Universal Life Assurance Society and M ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-16-1895
Reported in: (1896)ILR23Cal320
Sale, J.1. This is a case stated by agreement of the parties for the opinion of the Court under the provisions of Chapter XXXVIII of the Civil Procedure Code. The circumstances under which the point for determination has arisen are fully set forth in the case. The material facts determining the conclusion at which I have arrived are these : The assured, Mr. R. A. Sterndale, some time previous to 28th September 1894, proposed to the Company to convert his policy, which was then in full force and effect, into a sterling policy; the policy was issued in the year 1865, and all premiums bad been duly paid, the last of such payments having been made on the 1st of September 1894.2. The Company, on the 21st September, definitely accepted the proposal for conversion. Subsequently, with the object of carrying into effect the agreement arrived at to convert the policy, the Company requested Mr. Sterndale's agents to send them the policy to enable them to make the necessary endorsement.3. In compl...
Tag this Judgment!Raghunath Sahay Singh and anr. Vs. Lalji Singh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-16-1895
Reported in: (1896)ILR23Cal397
Banerjee and Rampini, JJ.1. This appeal arises out of certain execution proceedings. The appellants, who are the holders of a mortgage decree, applied for the execution of their decree by the sale of the mortgaged property. The judgment-debtors opposed the application on two grounds, namely : first, that execution was barred by limitation; and, second, that the mortgaged property having once been sold in execution of the decree could not be sold again. The first Court overruled these objections and ordered that execution should proceed. On appeal by the judgment-debtors, the Lower Appellate Court has reversed the first Court's decision, and disallowed execution.2. In second appeal it is contended for the decree-holders, first, that the Lower Appellate Court is wrong in holding that execution is barred by limitation; and secondly, that the Lower Appellate Court is wrong in holding that the previous sale was a bar to any further sale.3. The facts of the case, which are necessary to be re...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: a Reference from the Board of Revenue Under Section 46 of the S ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-12-1895
Reported in: (1896)ILR23Cal283
W. Comer Petheram, C.J., Prinsep and Pigot, JJ.1. Our answer to the question referred to us is, that the instrument proposed to be executed by Messrs. Robert Watson & Co. is a conveyance of freehold lands and good-will and a transfer of interests secured by leases, and that it will be properly stamped under Article 21 of Schedule I of the Stamp Act with stamps of the value of Rs. 1,485, that being the ad valorem duty on the conveyance of the freehold property, good-will, buildings and erections, and under Article 60 of the schedule with stamps of the value of Rs. 45, being a duty of Rs. 5 on the transfer of each of the interests secured by the leases.2. If we look at the substance of the transaction as disclosed by the deed, it is a conveyance of the freehold property of the vendors together with the good-will and buildings for a certain sum, and a transfer of the leasehold estates for another sum, and as that is what the deed is, it will be properly stamped under Section 7 of the Stam...
Tag this Judgment!Samar Dasadh Vs. Juggul Kishore Singh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-09-1895
Reported in: (1896)ILR23Cal366
Banerjee and Rampini, JJ.1. The only question raised in this case is whether the Lower Appellate Court was right in rejecting certain documents as being either irrelevant or not proved. The documents were: First, a copy of a plaint, Exhibit II; second, a road-cess return, Exhibit III; third, a peon's report, Exhibit VIII and, fourth, certain teiskhana papers, Exhibit I.2. In regard to the first three, the contention on behalf of the appellant was not really pressed, and we are of opinion that the Lower Appellate Court was quite right in rejecting two of them as irrelevant, namely, Exhibits II and III, and the third as not proved, namely, Exhibit VIII.3. It was, however, strongly urged before us that Exhibit I, consisting of the teiskhana papers, was admissible in evidence under Section 35 of the Indian Evidence Act.4. Now, to render a document admissible under that section, three conditions must be satisfied : First of all, the entry that is relied upon must be one in any public or oth...
Tag this Judgment!Bharasi Lal Chowdhry Vs. Sarat Chunder Dass and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-09-1895
Reported in: (1896)ILR23Cal415
Banerjee and Rampini, JJ.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff-appellant to recover possession of two occupancy holdings on the allegation that they belonged formerly to his father Tahfa Lal; that he is now entitled to the same by inheritance; and that the defendants Nos. 6 to 8 obtained collusive rent decrees in respect of them against the defendant No. 3, who alleges himself to be the purchaser of the holdings from the defendants Nos. 2 and 4, and have dispossessed him by having brought the holdings to sale in execution of the decrees obtained by them and having themselves become the purchasers.2. The defendants raised several objections in their defence, of which it is necessary for the purposes of this appeal to notice only one, namely, the plea of res judicata, as that is the only ground upon which the lower Court has dismissed the suit of the plaintiff.3. The plea is based upon a judgment passed in favour of the defendants Nos. 6 to 8 in a former suit for r...
Tag this Judgment!Jugdown Sinha Vs. Queen-empress
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-04-1895
Reported in: (1896)ILR23Cal372
Beverley and Gordon, JJ.1. The appellant has been convicted under Section 408 of the Indian Penal Code on the charge that being a servant, namely, a jemadar, of the Muktapore Indigo Factory, and- being in such capacity entrusted with dominion over certain plots of zerait land, he committed breach of trust in respect of those plots. It was objected at the trial, and the objection has been repeated here, that the offence so set forth really does not subsist, inasmuch as criminal breach of trust cannot be committed in respect of immoveable property. The Sessions Judge considered that this was a defect in form only, and he is inclined to read the charge in the sense that the accused dishonestly disposed of the plots of land in question in violation of a legal contract which he had made touching the discharge of his trust. The case for the prosecution is that it was the appellant's duty to see that certain plots of land were cultivated with indigo, and that he knowingly allowed them to be c...
Tag this Judgment!Milan Khan Vs. Sagai Bepari
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-02-1895
Reported in: (1896)ILR23Cal347
Trevelyan and Beverley, JJ.1. In this case a rule was granted by another Division Bench of this Court calling upon the Magistrate to 'show cause why the conviction of the petitioner should not be set aside.' The rule goes on to say, and the case sent back for re-trial' upon such and such grounds. It is contended that the words of the rule prevent us from directing the discharge of the accused in case we set aside the conviction. There would be no doubt that if the words if necessary 'came after the word' and, 'we could set aside the conviction and discharge the accused. Although rules are frequently granted on particular grounds, it is very unusual to tie the hands of the Court which is to hear a rule as to the action it should take in case the conviction is set aside. That is a matter which should' be left to the discretion of the Court which hears the rule. Giving a reasonable construction to the words of the rule, we do not think that the learned Judges who granted the rule ever int...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›