Kolkata Court August 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.
Padarath Ahir Vs. Jagdeo Singh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-30-1897
Reported in: (1898)ILR25Cal285
Treyelyan and Stevens, JJ.1. In the suit out of which this appeal arises, the plaintiff Padarath Ahir sued to recover Rs. 304-12-9 dams, which he had to pay into Court, in order to obtain the release of his crops from attachment, together with Rs. 7-0-9 dams, the costs alleged to have been incurred in making the attachment. The plaintiff's case was that the principal defendant Jagdeo Singh had wrongfully caused the crops to be distrained under colour of Section 121 of the Bengal Tenancy Act, 1885, as the crops of the second defendant Anarath Rai, falsely alleging that the latter was the tenant of the plaintiff's holding on which the crops had been grown. Both the Courts below have found in favour of the plaintiff on the facts.2. The plaint was filed within one month of the date when the attachment was made, but for some reason, which has not been explained to us, there appears to have been very great delay in disposing of the suit, and at a very late stage of the trial, some fourteen m...
Banku Behary Sanyal and anr. Vs. Syama Churn Bhuttacharjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-30-1897
Reported in: (1898)ILR25Cal322
Maclean, C.J.1. I feel no difficulty about this case. In my opinion the expression 'decree for money' used in the last paragraph of Section 546 of the Code of Civil Procedure applies to a case where a decree has been made for payment of arrears of rent. Arrears of rent are 'money.' It would be a very narrow construction to hold otherwise, especially as regards the operation of this particular section, which deals with the case of staying execution of a decree pending an appeal on certain terms as to giving security. Why that should not apply to a case where the decree is for arrears of rent, as well as to any other case of a money decree, I fail to see. I think the appeal must succeed and the order of the Munsif be restored with costs.Banerjee, J.1. I am of the same opinion. There is no reason why a decree for rent should not be held to be included within the meaning of the expression 'decree for money' in the last paragraph of Section 546 of the Code of Civil Procedure, nor is there a...
Deputy Legal Remembrancer Vs. Ahmad Ali
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-28-1897
Reported in: (1898)ILR25Cal333
Banerjee, J.1. This is a rule calling upon the accused person and the Magistrate of the district to shew cause why the sentence passed in this case should not be set aside as being contrary to law, and a proper sentence passed.2. The sentence passed by the learned Deputy Magistrate on the 3rd of May 1897 runs in these words: 'I find Ahmed Ali, boy, guilty of house-breaking by night for the purpose of committing theft, and instead of being imprisoned in the jail under Section 457 of the Penal Code, I direct under Section 399 of the Criminal Procedure Code and Section 7 of Act V of 1876 that Ahmed Ali be confined in the Calcutta Reformatory for two years for training in some branch of useful industry.'3. No cause is shewn either by the accused or by the District Magistrate.4. The order of the Deputy Magistrate, so far as it refers to Section 7 of Act V of 1876, is clearly wrong, as before the date of the order (3rd May 1897) and that of the commission of the offence (27th April 1897) tha...
Collector of Dinagepore Vs. Girja Nath Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-27-1897
Reported in: (1898)ILR25Cal346
Macpherson and Wilkins, JJ.1. This is an appeal from an award made by the District Judge of Dinagepore under the Land Acquisition Act (I of 1894) upon a reference made to him under Section 18 of that Act.2. It appears that the District Board of Dinagepore erected a bridge over the Tulai river on the road from Dinagepore to Krishnagunge. Near the place where that road strikes the river, and where the bridge now stands, there used to be a terry owned by the Maharajah of Dinagepore through whose estate the river Tulai flowed. That ferry ceased to exist when the bridge was erected and in consequence of its erection. Under these circumstances, the District Board proposed to offer to the Maharajah, upon whose land the bridge had been erected, the sum of Rs. 3,458-15-9 as compensation for the loss of his ferry, but the proposal was vetoed by the Commissioner of the Division, with the result that the land upon which the bridge stood was acquired under the Act, and that the Maharajah made a fre...
Upendra Lal Boral Vs. Hem Chundra Boral
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-27-1897
Reported in: (1898)ILR25Cal405
Macpherson and Wilkins, JJ.1. The appellant, in order to succeed in his suit, must show that there has been a valid gift or dedication of the property to the idol, and that he is entitled to be the shebait.2. Behari Lal Boral, who was the former owner of the property, made a will on the 17th Bysak 1280. In it he expressed his intention to establish the service of an idol, to construct a temple, and to appoint his wife Atarmoni to be the shebait. In the event of his being unable to effect this, he provided that she shall, by virtue of his will and in the exercise of powers equal to big own, establish the service of an idol, and by making a will in favour of it, manage the properties, construct a temple, and perform the sheba. Then there are certain provisions relating to the management and restricting alienation, and authorising her to appoint another person to be the shebait, The will concludes by providing that if Atarmoni died before doing those acts, the heirs of his spiritual prece...
Kudrathi Begum Vs. Najibunnessa
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-16-1897
Reported in: (1898)ILR25Cal93
Stevens, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit under Section 77 of the Registration Act. Registration was in the first instance refused by the Sub Registrar under the following order: 'Eight months from the date of execution have passed. Although summons was issued against the executant to appear, she did not appear to admit execution. I refuse registration under Section 35 of Act III of 1877, paragraph 159 of the 'Registration Manual.'' The plaintiff (now appellant) who was the party interested in the deed in question, then presented a petition under Section 73 of the Registration Act to the District Registrar of Mozufferpore, praying that an order for the registration of the document might be made after taking of evidence. The Registrar made over this application to the Special Sub-Registrar for the necessary action and report. The Special Sub-Registrar passed the following order: 'This deed, dated the 24th November 1894, was presented by Mahomed Hossein, agent of Kudrathi Begum, bef...
Radha Rani Dasi Vs. Brindabun Chundra Basack
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-16-1897
Reported in: (1898)ILR25Cal320
Maclean, C.J.1. A preliminary objection is taken that no appeal lies, the ground being that, inasmuch as this order of the 11th August 1896 was an order conditional upon the applicant finding security, it was not an order that was appealable within the meaning of Section 19 of the Succession Certificate Act. In my opinion, an order is not the less an order because there is a condition attached to it that security is to be given by the person in whose favour it is made. It is still an order. The appellant not unnaturally relies upon the case, of Bhagwani v. Manni Lal, (1891) I.L.R. 13 All., 214. With great respect to the learned Judges who decided that case, I regret I am unable to concur in that decision. It seems to me to be rather a narrow view to take of the term 'order' in Section 19.2. That disposes of the preliminary point.3. Upon the merits, the learned Judge in the Court below has granted this certificate without a tittle of evidence to show that the promissory notes referred t...
In Re: Courjon
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-1897
Reported in: (1898)ILR25Cal65
Sale, J.1. It appears that at the request of a nephew of the testator the Administrator-General applied for and obtained letters of administration with a copy of the will and codicils of the testator annexed 'limited' for the purpose of collecting the assets and paying the debts and charges of the interment of the deceased. Subsequently he applied to the Court and obtained also authority to pay the legacies given by the will and codicils. This application for an extension of his authority was made at the request of the present petitioner, who, as universal legatee and executrix according to the tenor, is now applying that the letters of administration granted to the Administrator-General may be revoked, and that probate be granted to her. I think there are sufficient indications in the codicils that the testator intended that the petitioner should administer as estate, and accordingly on the authority of the cases In the goods of Punc(sic)ard, (1872) L. R., 2 P. and D., 369, and In the...
Mahomed Abdul Hye Vs. Gajraj Sahai
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-13-1897
Reported in: (1898)ILR25Cal283
Stevens, J.1. This is an appeal from an order of the District Judge of Tirhoot, disallowing an objection by the judgment-debtor to the execution of the decree in respect of costs awarded against him by an order of Her Majesty in Council. The case in which those costs were awarded was one for the setting aside of a sale under the certificate procedure, Bengal Act VII of 1880. The contention was that, inasmuch as Section 2 of Bengal Act VII of 1880 provides that that Act shall, as far as is consistent with the tenor thereof, be construed as one with Act XI of 1859 passed by the Governor-General in Council and Act VII of 1868 passed by the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal in Council, the provisions of Section 34 of Act XI of 1859 apply to the present case. That section provides that ' if a sale made under this Act ' (i.e., Act XI of 1859) 'be amended by a final decree of a Civil Court, application for the execution of such decree shall be made within six months after the date thereof, otherw...
Sarat Chandra Banerjee and anr. Vs. Bhupendra Nath Basu and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-03-1897
Reported in: (1898)ILR25Cal103
Maclean, C.J.1. In my opinion the learned Judge in the Court below has made a mistake in law. In point of fact he holds that au executor under a Hindu will, before the Hindu Wills Act came into force, is substantially in the same position as an English executor under an English Will, in the sense that the property vests in him; and that this is his view is clear from the fact that he relied upon the well-known case of In re Tanqueray Willaume, (1882) L.R., 20 Ch. D., 465, decided in the English Courts, which shows that he regarded the property under the will as vested in the executor. I think it is clear from the authorities that have been cited that an executor under a Hindu will is not in that position which the learned Judge in the Court below seems to think, but he practically holds the property as manager, as is stated by Mr. Justice Markby in the case of Kherodemoney Doasee v. Doorgamoney Dossee (1878) I.L.R. 4 Cal. 455 where he says: 'It has been frequently, held that, the mere ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›