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.
Sheosagar Singh and ors. Vs. Sitaram Singh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-06-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal616
Lord Macnaghten.1. The question in this appeal is whether the infant respondent Sitaram Singh is or is not the son of one Anar Koer who died in November or December 1884.2. Upon the answer to this question the title of the appellants to a moiety of certain shares in mouza Nadaura depends.2. Anar Koer was the wife of Adit Singh, the guardian on the record, and alleged father of Sitaram, and she was the only child and heiress of Mahipat Singh.3. Mahipat Singh and a cousin of his, one Jawahir Singh, had purchased the shares in question on their joint account and had registered them in their joint names. Mahipat, who survived Jawahir, died in August 1882. On his death the plaintiffs, who were sons of Jawahir, applied for registration on the ground that the family was joint, and that the succession belonged to them. The Deputy Collector on a summary application decided in their favour. Anar Koer then brought a regular suit to recover her father's moiety. In that suit it was held that the fa...
S. Cahoon Vs. A. Mathews
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-03-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal494
Ghose and Gordon, JJ.1. The facts of this case are very short and simple. The petitioner, Mrs. Cahoon, has been residing in a certain house in Howrah with her daughter; and a certain person (Mr. Webber), who is a friend of the family, lived with them without payment of any hire or anything else, occupying the room next to that occupied by the girl. The latter was attacked with a mild form of small-pox, and the Magistrate of the District issued an order that she should be removed to the Campbell Hospital. When this order was attempted to be carried out, Mrs. Cahoon objected, and said that, if her daughter be removed, 'she must also be removed.' Thereupon, a prosecution was instituted against her under Section 269 of the Penal Code, the result being that she was convicted and sentenced to four days' simple imprisonment.2. The case was tried summarily; and the Magistrate, after giving a brief analysis of the evidence, stated as follows:It appears that the accused keeps lodgers in her hous...
Queen-empress Vs. Manick Chandra Sarkar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-03-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal492
Ghose and Gordon, JJ.1. We are of opinion that an application for sanction to prosecute an approver for giving false evidence should be made by motion on behalf of the Grown in open Court, and not by a letter of reference, such as has been submitted by the Sessions Judge in the present case.2. As to the other recommendation made by the Sessions Judge, we think that it is for the authority, which granted the conditional pardon, to withdraw it, and not for this Court to do so in the first instance under Section 339 of the Criminal Procedure Code....
In Re: Ram Chunder Ghose
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-03-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal567
Maclean, C.J.1. This case to my mind is governed by the decision of Sir Richard Couch in the case of In the Goods of Beake (13 B. L. R., Ap., 24), from which I see no reason to differ....
Latif HoseIn Vs. Mohamed Abdul Hafiz and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-01-1897
Reported in: (1897)ILR24Cal524
Trevelyan and Beverley, JJ.1. Although this appeal at first sight appeared somewhat formidable, and we were led to expect that very serious questions, having an important effect upon the religious rights of the Mahomedan community, had to be considered in it, yet soon after the [525] opening of the appeal by the learned Moulvie who appeared for the appellants had commenced, it became abundantly apparent that there was no substance at all in the appeal.2. This suit owes its origin to an unfortunate dispute between the Shea and Sunni inhabitants of a village called Pali in the district of Gya, and it is much to be regretted that the good sense of the members of the Mahomedan community in that village did not prevent, not only the expenditure of the money which has been thrown away in this litigation, but also the expression of the high and intemperate feeling which was shewn in this matter. It seems that the plaintiffs and the defendants are sharers in the village. The plaintiff is a She...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›