Kolkata Court May 1904 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.
Behari Lall Shaha Vs. Jagodish Chunder Shaha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-30-1904
Reported in: (1904)ILR31Cal798
Sale, J.1. This is a suit brought by the plaintiff to recover certain sums alleged to be due by the defendant to the plaintiff by virtue of an Indemnity contained in a verbal agreement set out in the 2nd paragraph of the plaint. The plaintiff alleges he carried on the business of a vendor of liquor in certain shops in Calcutta, and that in 1894 he was desirous of relinquishing his business in the shop, 148, Bow Bazar Street, and he entered into agreements with the defendant and one Basanto Coomar Shaha whereby the plaintiff was to sell the stook-in-trade of the shop and furniture to the defendant and Basanto Coomar Shaha, and that thereafter the defendant Basanto Coomar Shaha should carry on the business of vendors of liquor on their own account and responsibility. It is stated that the object of the agreement was to enable the defendant and Basanto Coomar Shaha to sell the liquor without obtaining a license, and in order to carry out this purpose, this agreement was entered into and t...
Parbati Bibee Vs. Ram Barun Upadhya
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-27-1904
Reported in: (1904)ILR31Cal895
Henderson, J.1. This suit was set down by consent for settlement of issues, and the only question, which I have to try, is what is the proper construction of the residuary clause in the will of the deceased Debi Prosad Agurwalla, a Hindu governed by the Mitakshara School of Law, who died in June last year.2. The will is in the English language and was prepared by an English solicitor.3. The clause is as follows:And as to the rest and residue of my estate I give and devise the same to my executor in trust to spend and give away the whole thereof in charity in such manner and to such religious and charitable purposes as he may in his discretion think proper.4. The executor appointed by the will is a Hindu. 5. On behalf of the plaintiff, who is the widow of the testator, it is contended that the gift of the residue is void for uncertainty.6. Had the testator been an Englishman or a person governed by the Succession Act, it was, I understood, admitted that the residuary clause in the will ...
SamiruddIn Sarkar Vs. Nibaran Chandra Ghose
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-27-1904
Reported in: (1904)ILR31Cal928
Pratt and Handley JJ.1. This is a Rule calling upon the District Magistrate to show cause why the conviction of the petitioner under Section 408 of the Indian Penal Code should not be set aside, the first ground being that the trial should have been confined to three instances of alleged misappropriation occurring within the period of one year.2. The charge recites that the accused realized by certain rent receipts, 23 in number, the sum of Rs. 103, of which the accused misappropriated the sum of Rs. 67. We think such a charge comes clearly within the provisions of Clause (2) of Section 222 of the Code of Criminal Procedural By specifying the rent receipts the charge went beyond what was necessary, and was to this extent favourable to the accused, because it gave him an opportunity of meeting the accusation regarding the misappropriation of a gross sum of Rs. 67. The case of Emperor v. Gulzari Lal (1902) I.L.R. 24 All. 254 is in point and supports this view of the matter.3. The second ...
Dwarka Nath Rai Chowdhry Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-17-1904
Reported in: (1904)ILR31Cal858
Pratt and Handley, JJ.1. The petitioner Dwarka Nath Rai Chowdhry applied to the District Judge of Faridpore for probate of the will of one Pyarimoni Chowdhurani. The case was contested, and in the result the District Judge pronounced the will be a forgery and directed the applicant for probate to be prosecuted for forgery and for giving false evidence. He also directed the other four petitioners, who were witnesses to the will, to be similarly prosecuted. Subsequently on the 13th April last Dwarka Nath Rai Chowdhry filed an appeal in the High Court against the orders of the District Judge refusing probate. We are asked to make an order directing that the proceedings now pending against the petitioners in the Criminal Court should be stayed pending the disposal of the appeal in the probate case. In the case of In re Devji Valad Bhavani (1893) I.L.R. 18 Bom. 581 it was held not to be an invariable rule that criminal proceedings should be stayed during the pendency of civil litigation reg...
Coventry Vs. Tulshi Pershad Narayan Singh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-1904
Reported in: (1904)ILR31Cal822
Francis W. Maclean, C.J. and Mitra, J.1. The respondents and their father Chhakouri Singh, since deceased, were members of a joint family governed by the Mitakshara system of Hindu Law. Chhakouri Singh, the managing member became indebted to the proprietors of the Keota Indigo Concern, who obtained on the let June 1899 a decree against him for Rs. 7,135 and costs.2. Chhakouri Singh died on the 26th July 1900, and the respondents are the survivors as well as his legal representatives. One of the decree-holders is also dead, and the appellants are now entitled to the benefit of the decree.3. The first application for execution was made on the 10th July, 1901. The appellants prayed for the substitution of the respondents as judgment-debtors in place of their deceased father as his legal heirs in possession and enjoyment of the family properties. They also asked for the levying of execution by attachment and sale of the family properties specified at the foot of the application. Notices un...
JoharuddIn Sarkar Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-10-1904
Reported in: (1904)ILR31Cal715
Pratt and Handley, JJ.1. One Gulu Mahmad, son of Toki accused another man of the same name as well as several Other persons with forging a mortgage deed for his land and being parties to the registration thereof. Gulu Mahmad and Basarat Ali were tried and convicted at the Sessions and their conviction was upheld by the High Court. Thereafter the Sessions Judge directed a further inquiry regarding others, who had been complained against. In the result 'the present appellants, seven in number, were committed for trial on the 12th, December last, all of them except Joharuddin Sarkar for abetment of forgery, and Joharuddin Sarkar for an offence under Section 82(d) of the Indian Registration Act, a like charge, being also added against Kutub Ali Sarkar. The trial was fixed for the 3rd February and on that day, after the assessors had been chosen, the accused through their pleader asked the Section sessions Judge to refer the case to the High Court for transfer on the ground that the Judge h...
Junab Ali Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-10-1904
Reported in: (1904)ILR31Cal783
Pratt and Handley, JJ.1. The petitioner was released from jail on the 26th September 1902, after having undergone one year's imprisonment on failure to furnish security for his good behaviour under section 110 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. About fifteen months afterwards fresh proceedings of the same nature were started against him and in the result he has been again ordered to furnish security to be of good behaviour for a period of one year.2. We think that the petitioner has not had a sufficient locus poenitentioe and that the evil reputation which he had before his imprisonment has still followed him and permeated the evidence of many of the witnesses. We therefore think that the order of the Magistrate dated the 29th February 1904, should be set aside and we order accordingly....
Emperor Vs. Robert Stewart
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-10-1904
Reported in: (1904)ILR31Cal1050
Geidt, J.1. I have seen Mr. Justice Pratt with reference to his decision cited by the Standing, Counsel and he has very kindly shown me his note of the case. From that it appears that in addition to depositions taken before the committing Magistrate other documents that did not form any part of the record sent up by the committing Magistrate were put in by the accused during the cross-examination of the witnesses for the prosecution and it was upon that circumstance that his decision was based. This is not the case here. The depositions of witnesses taken before the committing Magistrate and statements of the accused forming part of the record sent up by that Magistrate cannot be said to be evidence adduced by the accused after, the case for the prosecution is closed. As the witnesses have been examined in this Court, their depositions before the committing Magistrate may in the discretion of the presiding Judge he treated as evidence, independently of their being tendered by the accus...
Sarat Chandra Roy Chowdhry Vs. Asiman Bibi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-09-1904
Reported in: (1904)ILR31Cal725
Mitra, J.1. The plaintiff is the purchaser of an entire estate sold for arrears of land revenue under Act XI of 1859. He seeks to eject the defendants, who are actual cultivators, on the ground that their interests have been avoided by the sale. They on the other hand plead that, notwithstanding the sale, their interests are protected by the proviso to Section 37 of the Act of 1859.2. The Lower Courts have found that the holdings of the defendants consist of lands held by them partly for more than twelve years and partly for less than twelve years. The first Court, however, held that the two classes of lands were undistinguishable on the spot and decreed ejectment and mesne profits on the ground that the defendants having failed to make out, with respect to any specific parcel or parcels of land, their occupation as raiyats for more than twelve years before the sale, were not protected under the proviso to Section 37. The Court of first appeal did not disturb the finding of fact arrive...
In Re: William Watson and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-09-1904
Reported in: (1904)ILR31Cal761
Henderson, J.1. On this Rule Mr. W.B. Keen, the Trustee in Bankruptcy in England of the insolvents Watson, and Fleiderer seeks to set aside two orders made by this Court (sic) the 2nd February last adjudicating the debtors insolvents and (sic) purporting to vest their property in the Official Assignee of this Court.2. It appears that on the 30th January 1904 a Receiving order was made in England in respect of the estate of the insolvents and an Official Receiver appointed, upon the debtors' own petition. On the 1st February on their own application they were adjudged bankrupts and under Section 54 of the, Bankruptcy Act 1883, the estate of the Bankrupts vested in the Official Receiver.3. On the 16th February 1904 Mr. Keen was elected Trustee by the creditors and his appointment having been certified by the Board of Trade the property of the Bankrupts vested under Section 43 of the same Act in the Trustee as from the 30th January.4. It further appears that on the 1st February, admittedl...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »