Kolkata Court July 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.
Muhammad Yusuf-ud-dIn Vs. the Queen-empress
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-07-1897
Reported in: (1898)ILR25Cal20
Halsbury, JJ.1. In this case their Lordships a called upon to pronounce their opinion as to whether the arrest of Yusuf-ud-din, a (sic)ative of the Nizam's State, was lawfully executed by a warrant-issued by a Magistrate at Simla.2. The alleged offence for which the accused was arrested was the abetment in British territory of the offence which we may call compendiously bribery. Their Lordships have nothing to do with the question whether or not, if the accused had been found within British territory, he could have been lawfully tried and convicted of that offence, because the question reserved for their Lordships here to consider is whether or not the arrest of the man, while (sic) was at the station on a railway which is locally situated within the dominion of the Nizam, was a lawful arrest; nor, except for the purpose of his particular case, have their Lordships anything to do with the consequences of that arrest being lawful or otherwise. The one question which they have to determi...
Durga Churn Law and ors. Vs. Achha Mian Ohowdhry and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-06-1897
Reported in: (1898)ILR25Cal146
Maclean, C.J.1. I think we can dispose of these appeals, considering the very full arguments which have been submitted to us by both sides. The real point we have to decide lies in a somewhat narrow compass, and is whether or not the present proceedings are a suit within the meaning of Section 143 of the Bengal Tenancy Act.Banerjee, J.1. I concur with the learned Chief Justice in thinking that this appeal ought to he dismissed with costs. It arises out of certain proceedings instituted under Section 103 of the Bengal Tenancy Act. Upon the proceedings being instituted the Revenue Officer found that the tenants were tenure-holders holding at fixed rates of rent, and he, accordingly, recorded a declaration to that effect. Upon appeal to the Special Judge, that officer in the first instance held that the tenants were occupancy-raiyats, but on the question of fixity of rent he confirmed the decision of the first Court. But upon an application for review of judgment being made, he granted th...
Kashi Nath Naek Vs. Queen-empress
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-06-1897
Reported in: (1898)ILR25Cal207
Ghose and Wilkins, JJ.1. The appellant before us, Kashi Nath Naek, has been convicted by the Sessions Judge of Midnapore of offences under Sections 467 and 467/114 of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 82, Clause (d) of the Registration Act. The document which is said to have been forged is a Kobala, bearing date the 16th March 1896, purporting to have been executed by one Khetter Nath Das in favour of a certain lady, the wife of one Kashi Nath Das. The deed was presented for registration to the Sub-Registrar; bat he, suspecting something wrong, refused registration. It is said, however, that the appellant before us made certain representations before the said Registrar in regard to the person who presented the document for registration, and asked that officer to register the document, saying that it was all right. A prosecution was afterwards started against Kashi Nath Das and the appellant, Kashi Nath Naek; and it would appear from the record that Kashi Nath Das, the person who reall...
KarrabuldIn and ors. Vs. Moti Lal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-03-1897
Reported in: (1898)ILR25Cal179
Hobhouse, J.1. The plaintiff in this cause, now dead and represented by the respondents in the appeal, was formerly Queen of Oudh; and she sued to assert her right to a village in Oudh called Para Kuru. The Court of the Judicial Commissioner has maintained her suit, reversing the decision of the District Judge who dismissed it. The village has been the subject of almost incessant litigation, and of numerous judicial orders, during some twenty years, and its legal history is very complicated. But though it has been necessary to examine all the previous proceedings in order to ascertain the true effect of the orders and transactions which now govern the case, it will be sufficient for this judgment to touch only on a few of them.2. In the year 1870 a Mahomedan gentleman named Asghar, being then the sole recorded proprietor of the village, mortgaged it to one who in this discussion has been called Agha. Asghar afterwards granted the village by way of gift to his nephews Yusuf and Nasim, w...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›