Kolkata Court December 1898 Judgments
Pardhan Bhukhan Lal and anr. Vs. Narsing Dyal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-14-1898
Reported in: (1899)ILR26Cal300
Ghose, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for the recovery of money due upon a bond. The document stipulates for the payment of interest at the rate of Rs. 2 per cent, per mensem, but provides at the same time that if the money borrowed be not repaid on the due date, interest at the rate of Rs. 6 per cent, per mensem should be paid from that date. And the main question that has been discussed before us is whether the Courts below were right in decreeing to the plaintiffs interest at the rate of Rs. 6 instead of Rs. 2 per cent, per mensem from the date of default, it being contended on behalf of the defendant appellant that the stipulation to pay such increased rate of interest was but a penalty against which a Court of Equity should give relief.2. Both the Courts below have decreed the claim in full. And the learned Judicial Commissioner has affirmed the decree of the Court of First Instance allowing the plaintiff interest at the increased rate upon the ground that the stipulation t...
Tag this Judgment!Sheodeni Tewari and ors. Vs. Ram Saran Singh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-13-1898
Reported in: (1899)ILR26Cal164
O'Kinealy and Hill, JJ.1. In this case one Kunj Behari Singh executed a mortgage in favour of the predecessor of the plaintiffs. He nevertheless held under a katkina lease, which was granted on the same day, and which covered the mortgaged property. The plaintiffs brought a suit for arrears of rent on the katkina lease, sold a 2 annas share of the mortgaged property, and purchased it themselves. They now sue for possession of the property as auction-purchasers.2. Among other defences that have been raised in the suit is one that under Section 99 of the Transfer of Property Act the plaintiffs are prohibited from buying the equity of redemption in respect of the property over which they hold a mortgage, and that the remedy, if any, must be the remedy given by that section. This contention has received the approbation of both the lower Courts, where the suit has been dismissed.3. In second appeal it has been argued that Section 99 of the Transfer of Property Act is a section of procedure,...
Tag this Judgment!Jogendra Nath GossaIn and anr. Vs. Debendra Nath Gossain
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-12-1898
Reported in: (1899)ILR26Cal127
Sale, J.1. This is a rule calling on the judgment-creditor, who has obtained a decree on his mortgage under the Transfer of Property Act in the Alipore Court, to show cause why he should not be restrained from proceeding to a sale of certain properties which are included in his mortgage, but which are now in the hands of the Receiver of this Court.2. The suit in which this application is made, and in which the Receiver was appointed, is a partition suit in which a decree was made declaring the rights of the parties and directing the usual accounts and enquiries.3. It appears that pending the partition proceedings and after the appointment of a Receiver two of the co-sharers mortgaged their interest in the un divided properties to the judgment-creditor. Some of the mortgaged properties being within the jurisdiction of the Alipore Court the mortgagee instituted his suit in that Court, and seeks to bring to sale the particular properties mentioned in the rule, some of which are situated i...
Tag this Judgment!Brohmo Dutt Vs. Dharmo Das Ghose
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-12-1898
Reported in: (1989)ILR26Cal381
Francis W. Maclean, K.C.I.E., C.J.1. This is an appeal from the decision of Mr. Justice Jenkins, in which he held that a certain alleged mortgage deed executed by the plaintiff on the 20th of July 1895, was void and inoperative, and ought to be cancelled.2. The circumstances of the case are these: The suit is brought by a minor, suing by his mother as his next friend, to set aside a mortgage which the plaintiff had undoubtedly executed. I will take it for the purposes of this judgment that the contract was not a void one, but a voidable contract.3. The defence was that, even if the plaintiff were a minor, he fraudulently represented that he was of age and that fraudulent representation was acted upon, and that consequently, by a well recognised principle of equity, the plaintiff was not entitled to succeed.4. The first point for consideration is, whether or not the plaintiff, on the 20th of July 1895, was a minor or of full age. Upon that part of the case, we have heard but little argu...
Tag this Judgment!Moti Chand and anr. Vs. Pull Chand and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-12-1898
Reported in: (1899)ILR27Cal57
Francis Maclean, K.C.I.E., C.J.1. The appellants are admittedly out of time, and though no doubt we have a discretionary power--a power to be judicially exercised, upon judicial principle-under Rule 11 of chapter 7 of the High Court Rules, Appellate Side, to enlarge the time, upon 'sufficient cause' being shown, in the exercise of that discretion I do not see my way to acceding to the present application. The delay which occurred from the 13th August to the 22nd September is absolutely unexplained. So far from any sufficient cause having been shown for enlarging the time, no cause whatever has been shown. Why did the applicants wait from August 13th to September 22nd before applying for the office copies, and then only apply when the offices, if not actually closed, were on the eve of being closed for the vacation? This delay of nearly six weeks--three-fourths of the period allowed for delivering the paper book, is absolutely unexplained. Again, the applicants might have made the prese...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: H.C. Studd and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-09-1898
Reported in: (1899)ILR26Cal124
Ghose, J.1. I have considered the application of the petitioners for leave to put in five, instead of the twenty-nine, sets of process fees required by the Rules of the Court on the subject, and I think that no sufficient ground has Seen made out for the granting of such indulgence. I accordingly refuse me application.2. I express no opinion upon the question whether or not the Court has the power to relax in any case the process fee rules.Rampini, J.3. In this case, in consideration of his presenting twenty-nine analogous appeals, the applicant applies for a relaxation of the High Court Process fee rules, and prays that five sets instead of twenty-nine sets of process fees may be levied. There has hitherto been some diversity of practice in this Court in respect of this matter, some Benches readily granting a relaxation of these rules, and others refusing to do so.4. I am of opinion that this Court has no power to relax the process fee rules in any way. Process fees are levied under t...
Tag this Judgment!Dwar Buksh Sirkar Vs. Fatik Jali and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-09-1898
Reported in: (1899)ILR26Cal250
Macpherson and Stanley, JJ.1. In this case the property of the judgment-debtor was attached and proclaimed for sale. Two days before the date fixed for the sale the decree-holder represented to the Court that the judgment-debtor had satisfied the decree by payment, and asked that the execution case might be disposed of accordingly. No order was passed on this application. On the 1st November, the day fixed for sale, Dewar Bux Sirkar, the appellant in this Court, intervened, and objected to satisfaction being recorded on the ground that he had purchased the decree from the decree-holder by means of a kobala some time before the payment in satisfaction was alleged to have been made by the judgment-debtor, and that the decree-holder could not under such circumstances certify satisfaction. He also said that no payment had, in fact, been made, and that the decree-holder and judgment-debtor were colluding to defeat his right. The Subordinate Judge after taking evidence found that there had b...
Tag this Judgment!Rani Venkata Ramania Vs. Kherode Mull
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-09-1898
Reported in: 3Ind.Cas.400
1. This is an application for leave to appeal to Her Majesty in Council.2. It is not denied by the opposite party that all the formalities requisite for the filing of such an application have been complied with; but it is objected by them that it has been presented beyond the prescribed period. What we have to determine is whether or not the application can be received.3. The application was presented in the Privy Council Department on the 4th October last, that is, more than six months from the date of the decree appealed against, and the applicant claims to have it dealt with as if it was made on the day that Court re-opened after the Dusserah vacation, namely, on the 21st of November last under Section 5 of the Limitation, Act (XV of 1877) read with article 177 of that Act.4. It is objected by the learned Pleader for the other side that Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not apply to applications for leave to appeal to Her Majesty in Council, and the reasons given by him are two. ...
Tag this Judgment!FakaruddIn Mahomed Chowdhry a Minor Hafiz AminuddIn Ahmed Vs. G.L. Gar ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-07-1898
Reported in: (1899)ILR26Cal133
Francis W. Maclean, K.C.I.E., C.J.1. Three points have been argued before us upon this appeal. The first is, that the Court below had no jurisdiction to make the order appealed from. The order was made upon the application of the present appellant himself, who is now, for most obvious reasons, saying that the Court had no jurisdiction to make it. In my opinion the Court had ample jurisdiction to make the order.2. It is clear upon the evidence, the appellant's own evidence, that the minor ordinarily resided in Calcutta, and that being so, under Section 9 of the Guardians and Wards Act VIII of 1890, the Court below had ample jurisdiction to deal with the application.3. The second point is, that having regard to the provisions of Section 17 of the Guardians and Wards Act, the gentleman appointed as guardian was not a fit and proper person for the purpose. Hardly any argument, or anything worth calling an argument, has been addressed to us upon this point, which is absolutely untenable.4. ...
Tag this Judgment!Kanai Das Bairagi and anr. Vs. Radha Shyam Basack
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-05-1898
Reported in: (1899)ILR26Cal232
O'Kinealy and Banerjee, JJ.1. This is a rule calling upon the District Magistrate to show cause why the conviction and sentences in this case should not be set aside on the ground that the facts found do not amount to the offences of which the petitioners have been convicted, or why the sentences passed should not be reduced or otherwise altered.2. It appears that there is a well known Bengali Primer by one Ram Sundar Basack, and it has been found that this book has a property mark. The applicants are found to have sold large numbers of this book with a perfect knowledge that the book they sold was not the real book, but a book purporting to be the real one, and they were convicted of offences under Sections 482 and 486 of the Penal Code, and also of abetment of those offences under Section 109.3. It has been argued in this Court that books are not goods under Act IV of 1889. 'Goods' is defined in that Act to be anything which is the subject of trade or manufacture; and although it was...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »