Kolkata Court August 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.
Dulal Chandra Deb Vs. Ram NaraIn Deb
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-16-1904
Reported in: (1904)ILR31Cal1057
Brett and Mookerjee, JJ.1. The petitioner instituted a suit for the recovery of money due on a note of hand in the Court of Babu Jadav Chandra Bhattacharyya, Munsif of the 1st Court, Maulvi Bazar. That officer was invested with the powers of a Court of Small Causes fur the trial of suits cognisable by a Court of that description of values exceeding the value of the suit instituted by the petitioner. The suit was tried ex-pat to by the Munsif under his powers as a Court of Small Causes, and was decreed. That officer was then iransferred. His successor in office, Babu Saroda Kinkar Mookerjee, who was invented with similar powers as a Court of Small Causes, granted an application which was made to him by the defendant for a rehearing of: the suit, but he left the district on transfer before rehearing it.2. Babu Jamini Kanta Mookerjee, a Munsif of the 4th or probationary grade, succeeded him as Munsif of the 1st Court, Maulvi Bazar, and in duo course proceeded to try the cases pending in t...
Jnaendra Mohan Chowdhry Vs. Gopal Das Chowdhry
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-16-1904
Reported in: (1904)ILR31Cal1026
Brett and Mookerjee, JJ.1. The plaintiffs-appellant brought a suit against these defendants to recover rents and cesses due in respect of a putni taluq standing in the name of Ray Prasad Sarkar from Baisak 1303 to the Pous kist of 1306. The annual rent for the taluq was stated to be Rs. 212-4-0-1-4, payable in four quarterly kists; and after making allowance for certain payments made by some of the defendants and adding the sums due on account of cesses, the plaintiffs claimed the sum of Rs. 1,157-13-11-1-2 from the defendants. Defendants Nos. 1 and 3 did not contest the suit. Defendant No. 2, Maharaja Surjya Kanta Acharjya Bahadur, alone appeared to, oppose the claim of the plaintiffs. He pleaded that out of the taluq bearing a rental of Rs. 212-4-3-1-4 in respect of which relit was claimed, he held a separate jama bearing an annual kaimi mokarari jama of Rs. 27-13-3-1-10 and paying Rs. 10-3-0 as oesses. He pleaded that he had paid the full rent and cesses for 1303 and 1304, and conte...
Halimannissa Chowdhrani Vs. Secretary of State for India
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-05-1904
Reported in: (1904)ILR31Cal1036
Brett and Mookerjee, JJ.1. This is an appeal on behalf of the plaintiff in a suit instituted by her under Section 33 of Act XI of 1859, for the reversal of a sale, held under that Act pursuant to the provisions of Section 11 of Act VII of 1868 (B.C.). The plaintiff alleges that she is the proprietor of what is described in these proceedings as dakhal No. 1, situated in Government khas mehal Char Gazi, that she defaulted to pay the rent and cesses due on account of the August instalment of 1900, that the property having been advertised for sale, her agent offered to deposit the arrears before the sale, but the Collector, acting under the last paragraph of Section 6 of Act XI of 1859, refused to receive the money, and that consequently the property was sold and purchased by the Collector on the 18th December 1900 for Rs. 10 under Section 58 of Act XI of 1859. The plaintiff appealed to the Commissioner, but her appeal was dismissed on the 1st March 1901. The plaintiff accordingly sues to ...
Jotoni Chowdhurani Vs. Amor Krishna Saha and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-05-1904
Reported in: 1Ind.Cas.164
1. This is an appeal against an order of the Subordinate Judge of Chittagong allowing execution to proceed in satisfaction of a decree obtained by the opposite party against the present appellant. The decree is dated the 12th July 1898, and is an ordinary decree obtained in a suit brought by the present respondents to recover a sum of money due to them on a mortgage. The decree directed that the debt should be discharged by sale of the mortgaged property.2. It appears that prior to the mortgage a declaration had been issued by Government on the 19th July 1893 to the effect that the property covered by the mortgage would be acquired by Government for the Assam Bengal Railway. The date of the mortgage was the 28th November 1895 corresponding to 10th Aghran 1257 Maghi. In due course the property covered by the Government declaration including the mortgaged property appears to have been taken possession of by Government and compensation for the acquisition was awarded. There was a prior mo...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›