Kolkata Court September 1899 Judgments
RajnaraIn Bhadury and ors. Vs. Ashutosh Chuckerbutty
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-07-1899
Reported in: (1900)ILR27Cal44
Stanley, J.1. The main question in this case is, whether under the will of Kristo Lall Bhadury, his widow Bhubunessari Dabee took an absolute interest in his immoveable property or merely the ordinary estate of a Hindu widow.2. Kristo Lall Bhadury died many years ago, leaving an only widow, but no issue surviving. He made a will in Bengali, dated the 2nd of June 1862, of which the translation is as follows. (Beads will: see ante, page 45.)3. After the testator's death his widow took possession of his property and remained in possession of it until her death on the 17th of January 1898. She died intestate leaving the defendant Ashutosh Chuckerbutty her sole heir. The plaintiffs are grandsons of Roodnarain Bhadury, who was brother of Joynarain Bhadury, the grandfather of the testator Kristo Lall Bhadury, and as such are the reversionary heirs of Kristo Lall Bhadury. They contend that under the will of Kristo Lall Bhadury Bhubunessari Dabee only took the ordinary estate of a Hindu widow i...
Tag this Judgment!Kiran Chandra Roy and ors. Vs. Preonath Mitter and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-07-1899
Reported in: (1900)ILR27Cal290
Francis W. Maclean, K.C.I.E., C.J.1. This is a suit by certain purchasers under Act XI of 1859, asking in effect for a declaration of their right to khas possession of certain lands marked and described on the map, made by the Civil Court Ameen in this suit, as Abbus Mudafat howla, for a declaration that the defendants have no rights in such lands, and that, even if they have, they are not valid as against the plaintiffs under the above Act, and for consequential relief. The present appellants are defendants 7 to 9 and 11 to 15, and their defence put shortly is that the lands in question are included in a certain howla which was created before the Permanent Settlement, and consequently that their howla is a 'protected interest' within the meaning of Section 37 of Act XI of 1859. This virtually is the real issue between the parties. The Court below has decided against the present appellants, and hence the present appeal.2. There is no question that the plaintiffs purchased the zemindari...
Tag this Judgment!Queen-empress Vs. Natu and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-06-1899
Reported in: (1900)ILR27Cal137
Rampini and Pratt, JJ.1. In this case the Magistrate has revoked the pardons tendered to Natu and Kekar and has committed them for trial to the Sessions along with Sarafdi, though not for murder with which Sarafdi is charged. We agree with the Sessions Judge that the Magistrate's procedure is wrong, and that it was premature to remove Natu and Kekar from the category of witnesses. It seems clear from Clauses (2) and (3) of Section 337 of the Criminal Procedure Code that they are to be made available as witnesses at the trial of the case in the Sessions Court. Moreover, it is the intention of the law that a person to whom a tender of pardon has been made should not be tried for an alleged breach of the conditions upon which the pardon was tendered until the original case has been fully heard and determined. See Queen-Empress v. Sudra (1891) I.L.R., 11 All., 336. We must also point out that in committing the accused for trial for an offence under Section 194 of the Indian Penal Code the ...
Tag this Judgment!Harnabh Pershad Alias Rajajee Vs. Mandil Dass
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-06-1899
Reported in: (1900)ILR27Cal379
Macpherson and Wilkins, JJ.1. The parties to this suit are Jains of the Agarwalla class and residents of Arrah in the district of Shahabad. The suit relates to properties of considerable value, which are said to appertain to the estate of Jinwar Dass, who died in 1850 without issue, but leaving a widow Misri Koer. The plaintiff's case is that Misri Koer died on the 19th February 1883; and that he then under Mitakshara Law as heir of Jinwar Dass became entitled to all the properties claimed. The suit was instituted on the 28th January 1895, and the plaintiff says that he attained majority (21 years) on the 28th July 1894.2. The defendant says that the plaintiff is not the heir of Jinwar Dass, and that the suit is also out of time as Misri Koer died on the 6th January 1883, and the plaintiff attained majority more than three years before the date of suit. On the merits his case is that according to the custom prevalent among the Agarwalla Jains, a sonless widow acquires an absolute right...
Tag this Judgment!Queen-empress Vs. Deodhar Singh and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-05-1899
Reported in: (1900)ILR27Cal144
Rampini and Pratt, JJ.1. This is a reference by the Sessions Judge of Patna under Section 307 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Deodhar Singh, Sub-Inspector, and Fariduddin, Head Constable, were placed upon their trial, the former on three charges under Section 161 and two under Section 218 of Indian Penal Code and the latter for abetment of the three offences under Section 161.2. The jury, by a majority of three to two, found the accused persons guilty on all the charges. The Sessions Judge was willing to accept the finding on the charges under Section 218 against the Sub-Inspector, but was of opinion that the charges of bribery and abetment of bribery were not sustainable, because they rested entirely on the testimony of accomplices who had not been corroborated in material particulars. He, therefore, referred the whole case to this Court, being precluded by Clause (2) of Section 307 of the Criminal Procedure Code from recording a judgment of conviction on the charges under Section ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›