Kolkata Court June 1901 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.
NaraIn Mullick Vs. Badi Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-06-1901
Reported in: (1902)ILR29Cal227
Ameer Ali and Pratt, JJ.1. In the years 1284 and 1285 the plaintiffs leased from the ghatwals of mouza Aljhara a chak principally consisting of jungle, which is said to contain 300 bighas of land. One lease was from the ghatwals of a 4 annas share, the annual rent being fixed in perpetuity at Rs. 4-12, the other lease was from the ghatwals who owned the remaining 12 annas share, the fixed rent being Rs. 10 and a bonus of Rs. 36 having been paid.2. The plaintiffs, alleging that they had been dispossessed of 50 bighas of the property by the present ghatwals, sued for Rs. 55, damages for trees cut and for recovery of possession of the said lands, in which they alleged that they had a permanent title, and had also acquired a right of occupancy.3. The Munsif held that the holding was ryoti, and that the plaintiffs had acquired a right of occupancy. On appeal by the defendants, the learned District Judge held that the leases created permanent tenures in derogation of the rights of succeeding...
Gurmuk Roy and ors. Vs. Tularam
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-03-1901
Reported in: (1901)ILR28Cal424
Stanley, J.1. Let the books be produced before me on Saturday next at 11 o'clock for the purposes of inspection under Section 130 of the Civil Procedure Code. I reserve costs and adjourn this application....
Neel Comul Mookerjee and ors. Vs. Bipro Dass Mookerjee and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-03-1901
Reported in: (1901)ILR28Cal597
Harington, J.1. This is a suit in which Neel Comul Mookerjee, Naro Nath Mukerjee and Golab Roy Poddar who carry on business in co-partnership as merchants under the style and firm of N. Mookerjee and Son, sue one Bipro Dass Mookerjee and Rakhal Dass Mookerjee on a bond executed by these two defendants, the condition of which was that Bipro Dass Mookerjee should faithfully discharge the duties of his employment.2. The defendants take an objection by way of demurrer to the plaintiffs' claim and say that, admitting all the allegations in the plaint to be true, no cause of action is shewn to exist against these two defendants in favour of the plaintiffs.3. The plaint alleges that, previous to July 1895, Bipro Dass Mookerjee was employed by the plaintiff Neel Comul Mookerjee in his then firm of Neel Comul Mookerjee as a Sircar and Mohurir, and that in July 1895 Bipro Dass Mookerjee was appointed by the said firm as its cash-keeper.4. And that the plaintiff Neel Comul Mookerjee called upon t...
Ghatu Pramanik Vs. King Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-01-1901
Reported in: (1901)ILR28Cal613
Ghose, J.1. The appellant Ghatu has been convicted of the offence of murder and sentenced to transportation for life. The Judge and the assessors, who sat with him, were agreed as to the guilt of the accused, though one of the assessors was of opinion that he (the accused) was insane.2. The person killed was a lad, 8 years old, and was the brother-in-law of the accused.3. That he killed the accused, there can be no doubt upon the evidence. The only question is, whether he was at the time of unsound mind, and incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he was doing what was either wrong or contrary to law and therefore excused from responsibility (Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code).4. The occurrence took place early at dawn of the 28th October of the last year (12th Kartic). The appellant came on the preceding day to his father-in-law's house, where his wife (a girl of 11 years as stated by the parents, but of 13, as stated by the girl herself before the Committing Officer) wa...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›