Kolkata Court September 1903 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.
Manorama Dassi Vs. Kali Charan Banerjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-03-1903
Reported in: (1904)ILR31Cal166
Harington, J.1. Guru Prosanna Ghose died on the 18th January 1901, leaving the plaintiff his only daughter surviving him.2. The present suit is brought for-the purpose of determining certain questions which arise on the construction of his will.3. The first question is with reference to a devise of a house No. 47 Baniapooker Road. It is directed that the plaintiff shall be entitled to the rents and profits of that house for her life subject to her keeping the same in repair; the rates and taxes having to be paid out of the testator's estate. No express provision is to be found in the will as to what will happen to the house in question on the determination of the plaintiff's life estate, but there is a provision directing the executors, after carrying out the provisions of the will, to sell the residue of such of the estate as consists of landed property and to make over the proceeds thereof to the University of Calcutta. In my opinion the reversion in No. 47, Baniapooker Road, expecta...
Kali Krishna Sarkar Vs. Raghunath Deb
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-03-1903
Reported in: (1904)ILR31Cal224
Rampini and Mitra, JJ.1. Killa Patia is an impartible estate in Orissa. The Baj family is governed by the Mitakshara law. Raja Dibya Singh was lately the proprietor. He mortgaged a part of the estate to the present appellant. The appellant got a decree on the mortgage on the 29th August 1895, caused a sale of the mortgaged property, and succeeded in realising a portion of the debt. For the balance he applied under Section 90 of the Transfer of Property Act and obtained a personal decree against the mortgagor Raja Dibya Singh. Raja Dibya Singh died and the Raj came to be in the possession of his brother, Sri Raja Raghunath, the present respondent. Raja Dibya Singh left him surviving a widow and a daughter; but as the family Vas governed by the Mitakshara law, they were superseded by the surviving brother, as the property was ancestral.2. The application for execution out of which the present appeal has arisen was presented on the 14th May 1902, and by it the decree-holder sought to levy...
Chandi Charan Dhar Vs. Boistab Charan Dhar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-03-1903
Reported in: (1904)ILR31Cal284
Henderson, J.1. This application raises a question of (sic) able importance not only to the plaintiff in this ease, but also to the public. The suit was one for the administration of the estate of Kissendoyal Dhar, deceased, and on the 31st January 1901 a reference was made to the Registrar to take certain accounts and make a number of enquiries. Permission was given to raise at the reference the following issues which had been raised at the hearing of the suit, namely, (i) whether the sum of Rs. 5,000 deposited with Anderson, Wright & Co., formed part of the estate of the deceased; and (ii) whether the Government paper for Rs. 5,000 deposited with Graham & Co., formed part of the same estate. These issues arose in this way: It was said that Kissendoyal had deposited with Anderson, Wright & Co. a Government promissory note No. 110550 of the 4 per cent loan of 1842-43 for Rs. 5,000 by way of security for the father discharge of the duties of one of his sons, Kanai Lal Dhar, the father o...
MafizuddIn Vs. Korbad Ali Chowdhuri
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-03-1903
Reported in: (1904)ILR31Cal393
Francis W. Maclean, C.J.1. This is a suit by the plantiffs to avoid certain undertenures held by the defendant-appelant. The property was sold under Act XI of 1859, for defaulters and so were responsible for the sale; and, secondly, that the lands were of such a nature that the case falls within the fourth exception to Section 37 of Act XI of 1859. The facts lie within a narrow compass. On the 23rd of September 1889, the taluk was put up for sale by auction for the realization of arrears of revenue, and purchased by the plaintiffs in the name of their servant; after their purchase, the plaintiffs were unable to pay the Government revenue, when it became due, and the taluk was again put up to auction for the arrears of revenue for the September kist of 1891 and the plaintiffs again purchased it in the name of their am-mukhtear. They now seek to avoid the undertenure of the present appellant It is not, open to them to do so. The second sale was owing to their own default, they were the d...
Krishna Prosad Roy Vs. BipIn Behary Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-02-1903
Reported in: (1904)ILR31Cal228
Brett and Pargiter, JJ.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff to recover possession of certain lands in which he said he had purchased a taluki right from Adhar Chandra Shaha on 19th Baisakh 1296, and from which he had been dispossessed by defendant No. 4 under a decree obtained under Section 9 of the Specific Relief Act on the 28th June 1899.2. In 1891, Parmeshwari Chowdhrani, predecessor in interest of defendants 1 and 2, obtained a decree for arrears of rent in respect of the lands in suit, and attached them in execution of the decree. Thereupon the plaintiff put in a claim under Section 278, Code of Civil Procedure, which, however, was disallowed on the 14th January 1891. The plaintiff then paid up the money due under the decree, and the attachment was withdrawn. Subsequently, however, the lands were again attached for arrears of rent and sold, and they were purchased by the decree-holder, and according to the defence settled with defendant No. 4.3. The only p...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›