Kolkata Court February 1897 Judgments
Srinath Roy Vs. Godadhur Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-24-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal348
Jenkins, J.1. In this case the documents of title relating to the immoveable property mentioned in the plaint were delivered with intent to create as security thereon, and as the transaction took place in the town of Calcutta I am of opinion that a good mortgage was thereby created, though some of the properties are situate outside the limits of the town. The only question is as to the appropriate remedy. I was referred to the statement in a text book that the practice in mortgages of this class is regulated by the English practice, and if that statement were correct then the remedy would be foreclosure. It seems, however, that the practice in this Court has for a long series of years been to decree a sale, and I accordingly will make a decree in that form. I think it would be right to preface the decree with a statement to the following effect: 'It appearing that the documents of title relating to the immoveable properties in question and mentioned in the plaint have been delivered to...
Tag this Judgment!Fattah Chand Vs. Queen-empress
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-23-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal499
Ghose and Gordon, JJ.1. The appellant before us Fattah Chand, has been convicted by the Officiating Chief Magistrate of Calcutta of the offence under Section 408 of the Penal Code, namely, of criminal breach of trust as a clerk or servant of the complainant, in respect of certain monies belonging to him. It appears that upon the complaint being lodged, the Magistrate issued a warrant for the arrest of the accused; and the latter was brought up before the Magistrate under that warrant. He then made certain statements which, however, were not reduced to writing. At the trial which subsequently took place, the Magistrate took evidence upon the charge preferred against the accused; and finding that the offence attributed to him had been proved, convicted him under Section 408, and sentenced him to two years' rigorous imprisonment.2. The Magistrate in his judgment refers to the statement that the accused made before him when he was brought up before him under the warrant; and says that, as ...
Tag this Judgment!Dal Koer Vs. Lala Ramjewan Lal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-18-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal406
Trevelyan and Beverley, JJ.1. These three appeals are against decrees made in three, several [409] suits were tried together; and the only question before us is as to the construc-the will of one Lala Sunder Lal made on the 25th May 1882.2. Before referring to the terms of the will it will be well to mention that the point is shortly whether, having regard to the terms of the will, the husband of a daughter who survived the testator is entitled to obtain the share given by the will to that daughter, or whether he is to be excluded from any rights under the terms of the will. It is not disputed that if an absolute estate was given to the daughter by this will, and there was nothing in the will giving the share to some one else on her death, the husband as her stridhan heir would be entitled to it. The important parts of the will are referred to by the learned Judge in the Court below. The testator begins by expressing a hope that the family will continue to live jointly, but in the even...
Tag this Judgment!Khakon Singh Vs. Bash Dhary Gope
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-18-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal433
Treyelyan and Beverley, JJ.1. The plaintiff alleges that he holds a thika of mouzah Makbulpore Denga from 1294 to 1300 F. The defendant was a former thikadar of this village, and it is admitted that he still occupies lands in it.2. In 1889 the plaintiff sued the defendant for rent for the years 1294, 1295 and a part of 1296 F, on the allegation that he held 8 bighas 14 cottahs odd at a money rent of Rs. 41-7-9 per annum (including cesses), and some 50 or 60 bighas of other land at a corn rent, the total claim being for Rs. 2,016. The defendant, on the other hand, alleged that he held 118 bighas odd, and that he held it all at a money rent of Rs. 131-14.3. The Courts found that the plaintiff had failed to prove his allegations, and they accordingly gave him a decree for the amount of rent admitted by the defendant. It was expressly stated in that case that the question as to the nature and rental of the defendant's tenure was left open.4. In June 1894 the plaintiff brought the present s...
Tag this Judgment!Baboo Lall and Os. Vs. Joy Lall and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-18-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal533
Sale, J.1. This is a suit by the plaintiffs who carry on business under the name of Sanker Lall Augurwallah to recover Rs. 5,000 [534] with interest alleged to have been advanced as a loan to the defendants in their firm of Asaram Joy Lall. In respect of this loan two hundis were drawn and accepted by the defendant Joy Lall in the name of his firm Asaram Joy Lall and delivered to the plaintiffs; the hundis, the dates of which are, respectively, 6th and 10th November 1896, were payable after 61 days from their respective dates. The defendants' business was closed on the 17th November and the plaintiffs, alleging that the loans had been obtained by fraudulent misrepresentations, instituted this suit before the due date of the hundis, the plaint being tiled on the 27th November 1896.2. In the plaint the circumstances are set out under which the advance of the money was made to the defendants; and after stating that in respect of these advances the hundis were drawn and accepted by Joy Lal...
Tag this Judgment!Bama Sundari Dasi Vs. Sukurullah Kazi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-17-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal404
Francis William Maclean, C.J.1. The first point taken in this appeal was, that inasmuch as the plaintiff was not registered, the suit was not maintainable, having regard to Sections 78 and 38 of Bengal Act VII of 1876. The question is, whether the plaintiff is a proprietor within the meaning of the term as used in those sections. I think that the purview of the Act is shown by the preamble which runs as followsWhereas it is expedient to make better provision for the preparation and maintenance of registers of revenue-paying and revenue-free lands, and of proprietors and managers thereof.' Looking at the Sections to which I have referred and to the preamble [406] of the Act, I think the term 'proprietor' was intended to be confined to a zemindar and not to a putnuiar; the first objection therefore fails.2. Another preliminary objection was taken that an appeal would not lie haying regard to Section 153 of the Bengal Tenancy Act. Having regard to sub-section (b) of that section, it seems...
Tag this Judgment!Gupi Sundari Dasya Vs. Shiha Haldar and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-17-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal449
Maclean, C.J.1. There are three points raised in this appeal, The first and the principal one is the question whether the Court below had jurisdiction to entertain the suit. The appellants contend that the suit ought to have been brought in the Pubna Court, whilst in fact it was brought in the Goalundo Court. The respondents, however, urge that, be that as it may, if there he any reasonable ground for uncertainty as to the Court having jurisdiction with respect to the subject-matter of the suit, then it is open to this Court, under Section 16A of the Code of Civil Procedure, not lo allow that objection to be raised. What we really have to consider then first is, whether there was any reasonable ground for uncertainty as to which Court had jurisdiction. I am by no means satisfied that the District Judge was not right in finding that the Goalundo Court had jurisdiction to try the suit: but, if not, I think upon the facts that there is a reasonable ground for uncertainty as to which Court...
Tag this Judgment!T. Barlow and ors. Vs. Gobindram and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-16-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal364
Sale, J.1. The plaintiffs in this suit claim to be entitled to the exclusive use of the number 9000 as a mark for distinguishing certain cloth known in the Calcutta market as black-beetled cloth which is imported by them into Calcutta, and they seek to restrain the defendants by the injunction of his Court from selling or dealing with any black-beetled cloth other than that imported by the plaintiffs, which is stamped or impressed or marked with the number 9000, or any colourable imitation of such number. The defendants admit that they purchased and obtained delivery of, from Messrs. Hoare, Miller &, Co., a consignment of five cases of black-beetled cloth marked with a certain design, a part of which design was the number 9000, and that they have since sold and disposed of the said goods in the Calcutta market. They, however, deny that the plaintiffs have a right to the If exclusive use of the number 9000 as a distinguishing mark for the goods imported by them, and they also deny that ...
Tag this Judgment!Kally Dass Ahiri Vs. Monmohini Dassee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-12-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal440
Jenkins, J.1. This is a suit for the recovery of certain premises in Calcutta known as 173, Aheereetolah Street, and to enforce payment of certain arrears of rent and mesne profits. The plaintiff was at the date of the Small Cause Court suit, to which I will later refer, the owner of these premises, subject to a subordinate tenure vested in the defendant at a monthly rent of Rs. 15-8. The rent having fallen into arrear the plaintiff, in conjunction with his mother, sued the defendant for these arrears in the Small Cause Court, and by way of defence the folio wing pleas were raised:2. 'Denies tenancy under the plaintiff or any one else, and admits occupation as owner of the land. Denies payment of any rent to the plaintiffs. Never indebted. Misjoinder of parties. Denies jurisdiction.'3. The oral evidence is to the effect that the denial of tenancy, and the claim of occupation as owner, were set up at the first hearing on the 28th April 1892, and there can be no doubt that at any rate th...
Tag this Judgment!Kali Krishna Tagore Vs. Izzatannissa Khatun and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-10-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal557
Maclean, C.J.1. I think that this preliminary objection must prevail. In Section 586 of the Code of Civil Procedure it is provided that no second appeal shall lie in any suit of the nature cognizable in a Court of Small Causes when the amount or value of the subject-matter of the original suit does not exceed Rs. 500. If we turn to the Small Cause Courts Act (IX of 1887) we find this provision in Sub-Section 2 of Section 15 of the Act, 'Subject to the exceptions specified in that schedule,' that is, the second schedule of the Act, 'and to the provisions of any enactment for the time being in force, all suits of a civil nature, of which the value does not exceed Rs. 500, shall be cognizable by a Court of Small Causes.' If the matter stood there, there could be no reasonable doubt that this was an action cognizable by the Small Cause Court, and therefore within the meaning of Section 586 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and consequently no second appeal would lie.2. But it has been ingeni...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »