Kolkata Court March 1897 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.
Kristodhone Ghose Vs. Brojo Gobindo Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-26-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal895
Maclean, C.J.1. (Banerjee, J. concurring). This appeal raises a very short point. The plaintiff is a zemindar, the defendant is his tenant. By the kabuliat the defendant agreed to pay the plaintiff an enhanced rent of Rs. 12-12-10. This enhancement exceeds, by more than two-annas in the rupee, the rent. previously paid by the tenant. By Section 28 of the Bengal Tenancy Act, it is provided that 'where an occupancy raiyat pays his rent in money, his rent Shall not be enhanced except as provided by this Act.' By Section 29 the money rent may be enhanced by contract, and by Sub-section (b) it must not be enhanced so as to exceed, by more than two-annas in the rupee, the rent previously pay able by the raiyat. The plaintiff is suing the defendant for the enhanced rent; the latter says the agreement contravenes the provisions of the Bengal Tenancy Act, and having regard to Sections 23 and 24 of the Contract Act (Act IX of 1872) the agreement is void. I think he is right. But the appellant co...
Hem Coomaree Dassee Vs. Queen-empress
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-24-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal551
Ghose and Gordon, JJ.1. The petitioner before us, Hem Coomaree Dassee, a purdanashin Hindu lady of rank, residing in the town of Calcutta, was subpoenaed by the Chief Presidency Magistrate of Calcutta to appear in his Court for the purposes of giving evidence in a certain criminal case. Thereupon, she presented a petition to the Magistrate, stating that she had never appeared in any Court or other public place, and asking that a commission might be issued for her examination. The Magistrate, on the 17th February last, rejected her application, upon the ground that, under Section 503 of the Code of Criminal Procedure he had no power to issue such a commission, she being a resident within his jurisdiction. He recorded, however, at the same time that he 'shall be prepared to examine the lady in the presence of the accused, either in Court at a time when it shall be cleared for the purpose, or, if thought more convenient, in his private room in the Court house.'2. Dissatisfied with this or...
Adhar Chandra Dass Vs. Lal Mohun Das and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-24-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal778
Maclean, C.J.1. When one is in possession of the facts of this ease, the point which one has to decide is reduced to very narrow limits. The question is whether the application of the decree-holder of 5th June 1893 was an application made by him in accordance with law to take some steps in aid of execution within the meaning of Sub-section 4 of article 179 of schedule II of the Limitation Act.2. The facts are these: The appellant here is the judgment-creditor and the respondent is the judgment-debtor. I need not go through the various steps which the judgment-creditor has taken to try and obtain the fruits of his judgment, but he took several, and has not obtained payment. On the 5th June 1893 he made an application of a double nature: one part of the application was that the heirs of the deceased judgment-debtor might be substituted in the place of the judgment-debtor who had died, so that the proceedings, might be carried on against them; and the other part of the application was tha...
Bahabal Shah Vs. Tarak Nath Chowdhry
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal691
Maclean, C.J.1. In this case the plaintiff sued the defendant, who is a sub-inspector of police, for damages for having, as he alleged, wrongfully and illegally entered and searched his house.2. The question which we have to decide is whether the police officer, under the circumstances in this case, had any right to enter the plaintiff's house and to make a search.3. The Munsif before whom the suit was originally brought found in favour of the plaintiff, and he gave the plaintiff Rs. 10 for damages; the plaintiff stated that he desired nothing in the nature of large damages, and that the only object of his action was to clear himself against the imputation which lay upon him by reason of the proceedings which were taken by the police officer.4. The case then came before the District Judge in appeal. He reversed the decision of the Munsif and dismissed the plaintiff's suit. The District Judge in his judgment has not gone into the question of law which was raised before Mr. Justice Rampi...
Rewat Lall and ors. Vs. Beni Prosad Sinha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal746
Trevelyan and Beverley, JJ.1. As these two appeals arise from the same judgment it will be convenient for us to deal with them in one judgment, although the questions which have to be determined in them are different. The suit was somewhat a complicated one, but as the argument before us has been confined to matters in which the appellants in these appeals are concerned, the facts necessary to be mentioned are not many. The suit was brought to enforce a mortgage of certain properties, and all the persons interested in those properties were made parties.2. The appeal No. 195, which was argued first, was preferred by the 9th defendant, Beni Prosad. Shortly the position of Beni Prosad was that he had purchased a dar-mokurari tenure in mehal Bhadakhra at a sale held for arrears of rent of that tenure. That tenure had belonged to the mortgagor, and in the fourth of the mortgages sued upon there were included the mortgagor's milkiat and mokurari rights in 3 annas 8 dhurs of this mehal. This ...
Mahammad Mumtaz Ali Vs. Ram Autar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-20-1897
Reported in: (1898)ILR24Cal853
Watson, J.1. The respondent Rajah Mahammad Mumtaz Ali Khan (sic)eeded on the death of his uncle the Rajah Umrao Ali Khan to the Bilaspur (sic)te in district Gonda, which includes the taluka of Utraula. At that time respondent was a mere infant: and his estate remained under the charge (sic)the Court of Wards from the end of the year 1865 until October 1886 when he attained majority. In March 1889 he instituted the present suit before the District Court of Fyzabad against Ram Autar, Salig Ram and others, in which he prays for (1) a decree for possession of the entire village Mahammadpur Banjarha which is within taluka Utraula; (2) cancellation of an order passed by the Settlement Court on the 30th June 1871 which decreed the village Banjarha 'for birt,' to one Ram Ghulam; and (3) a decree for mesne profits.2. The appellants are the original or substituted defendants in the suit; and with the exception of one who has acquired by purchase a share in the interest claimed by the others they...
Ramjibun Serowgy Vs. Oghore Nath Chatterjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-19-1897
Reported in: (1898)ILR25Cal401
Sale, J.1. The point which is raised in this case has been elaborately argued, but I think it would be of no advantage if I took further time to consider the arguments, because it seems to me that the authorities, both English and Indian, are pretty clear. The claim in this suit is based on a promissory note executed by the defendant, under the terms of which there is an absolute engagement on the part of the defendant to pay on demand the sum of Rs. 7,000.The defendant admits the execution of the note, and admits consideration for it, and the only defence is that which is set up in the 4th paragraph of his written statement. That paragraph runs as follows:That in the year 1895 a settlement of accounts was come to between the plaintiff and the defendant, and it was thereupon agreed between them that the said hundis should be cancelled, and that the defendant should pay the plaintiff the sum of Rs. 4,000 in cash and give him a promissory note for the sum of Rs. 7,000 in full discharge o...
Grish Chunder Roy Vs. Dwarkadass Agarwallah
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-17-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal528
Ghose and Gordon, JJ.1. the facts, out of which the questions before us have arisen, are shortly these:A complaint was instituted before the Presidency Magistrate of the Northern Division of the Town of Calcutta against the petitioner for cheating under Section 417 of the Penal Code. The case was transferred for trial to an Honorary Presidency Magistrate, Mr. Farr. After several postponements, the case was taken up on the 19th December last. The complainant, who was then present in Court, stated that his attorney was not there, and that he was not in a position to proceed with the case, and applied for a postponement. The Magistrate adjourned the case for half an hour to enable the complainant to bring his attorney or instruct somebody else. When the case was afterwards called on, an attorney appeared for the complainant, and applied for the transfer of the case to the Northern [531] Division Magistrate on the ground that the complainant had been informed that the accused was a client ...
Dwarika Nath Mukerjee Vs. Dwijendra Nath Ghosal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-17-1897
Reported in: 53Ind.Cas.103
Maclean, C.J.1. This is a rent suit, the rent being payable partly in cash and partly in kind, and the Question which we have to decide depends upon the true construction of the kabuliyat which is set out at page 11 of the paper book. The defendant, the present appellant, who is the tenant, says that under that document, if the paddy which he agreed to deliver were not delivered, the parties themselves put a value upon it namely, a value of Rs 30. The plaintiff's contention is, that if the paddy were not delivered, then that ha was entitled to gat the value of it at the market rate of the day. Now by the argument, the defendant, who, as I have just said, is the tenant, agreed to pay a rent which amounted to Rs. 59-10-0 and also to deliver to the plaintiff 11/2 bish of paddy 'which may be valued at Rs. 30 by guess', which I understand is by estimation, 'making a total of Rs. 89-10 as. the assessed rent, as also to offer a bonus of Rs. 15.' Then the document goes on to say that he 'would...
Pachkauri and anr. Vs. Queen-empress
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal686
Ghose and Gordon, JJ.1. The appellants before us, Pachkauri and Jodha Singh, have been convicted by the Sessions Judge of Gya of the offences under Sections 147, 149 and 325 of the Penal Code, namely, that they were members of an unlawful assembly; that force and violence were used in the prosecution of the common object of that assembly; and that grievous hurt was caused to some one or other of that party of the complainant in furtherance of that common object. And each of them has been sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment.2. It appears that there was a dispute between two parties, described as the.& Babhuns and Mahomedans, about certain lands; but it is found by the Sessions Judge that the Mahomedans obtained possession five or six years ago, and continued to be in peaceful possession until, at any rate, October 1895. The case for the prosecution, however, is that in execution of a rent decree (ex parte) obtained against a third party, the complainant's employer purchased th...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »