Kolkata Court December 1909 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.
Pran Krishna Shaha and ors. Vs. Naba Kumar Chowdhury
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-08-1909
Reported in: 4Ind.Cas.494
1. This, appeal arises in a litigation regarding certain property which is claimed by the plaintiff as his Lakheraj Brahmotar property.2. Both the lower Courts have found that though the plaintiff was unable to connect this property with any sanad, or document, or grant, it was sufficiently proved that he had been in uninterrupted possession for over 12 years.3. On behalf of the defendants,it is now urged, first, that there was no issue, and no allegation on the side of the plaintiff, as to title having been acquired by adverse possession for over 12 years; and, secondly, that the lower appellate Court has wrongly admitted, and considered in evidence copy of a deposition given by the defendant No. 3 on the 1st April 1903.4. It is unnecessary to decide the second contention though the inclination of our mind is that the document in question was not admissible, regard being had to Section 33 of the Indian Evidence Act. However that may be, we think the findings arrived at by the lower ap...
Amarendra Nath Bose and ors. Vs. Shuradhany Dasi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-08-1909
Reported in: 5Ind.Cas.73
1. The events which led to the litigation oat of which the present appeal arises he in a narrow compass and may be briefly narrated. One Lokenath Ghose, the admitted owner of the properties in dispute, died in May 1894. On the 16th February of the same year, he had made a testamentary disposition of his properties, the legal effect of which is now in controversy between the parties. Lokenath left a widow, Mangala Dasi and a son Hem Chandra Ghose. Mangala died in April 1905 and had previously executed on the 13th January 1905 a deed of gift in Respect of the disputed property in favour of her daughter-in-law Surodhani Dasi and grand daughter Rajabala Dasi, who are the plaintiffs in the present litigation. On the 2nd January 1900, Hem Chandra had, however, executed a mortgage in favour of the first three defendants in which he professed to deal with the property as if he was absolutely entitled thereto. The mortgagees sued to enforce their security, and, on the 9th June 1906 obtained an ...
Upendra Nath Sen and anr. Vs. Kameswar Kolita and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-08-1909
Reported in: 5Ind.Cas.80
1. This is an appeal in a suit to recover arrears of rent. The Judge of the Assam Valley Districts having allowed the plaintiffs local rate at one anna in the rupee, instead of at one anna and a half in the rupee, as claimed, and having disallowed damages on the arrears of rent, the plaintiffs appeal, and, on their behalf, the contentions raised refer to the two matters we have just mentioned.2. The Judge observes that legally the plain-tins ought to get only one anna in the rupee, though for a long time they have been realising at If annas.3. The Assam Local Rates Regulation 1879, provides (Section 17) that a landholder may realise from the tenant a part of such rate in certain proportions, and Section 3 of the Regulation provides that the maximum rate cannot exceed 1 anna 4 pies for every rupee of the annual value of the land. From a note in the Land Revenue Manual, published under the authority of the Local Government, it appears that the maximum rate at present imposed is one anna ...
Talek Singh and ors. Vs. Jalal Singh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-08-1909
Reported in: 5Ind.Cas.130
Harington, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendants against a decision of the Subordinate Judge of Mozaffarpur, reversing a decision of the Munsif in a suit, in which the plaintiffs claimed certain principal money lent to the defendants on what is alleged to be ah usufructuary mortgage of certain lands. The first Court decided in favour of the defendants but on appeal the plaintiffs were successful and got a decree for the money claimed. The document under which the money was advanced by the plaintiffs to the defendants has been placed before us. It recites the reason for which the defendants borrowed the money and it goes on to say: In lieu of interest of the said amount I give in sudhbhurna 6 bighas, 15 cottas zerait khas in the entire 11 plots as per boundaries given below situated in 16 gds 1 k. pucca share out of a privately partitioned patti of 8 annas out of 16 annas Mouzah Baligaon Pergana Luresa Touzi No. 7654,' and it farther says, 'which is now in my possession, from 1298 to...
Chowdhury Mahadeo Pershad Vs. Mathura Tanti
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-08-1909
Reported in: 5Ind.Cas.723
1. This is an appeal from a decision of the District Judge reversing a decision of the Munsif who decided in favour of the plaintiff. The suit was one for possession of land which the plaintiff alleged to be his zerait land and the substantial point that is taken in appeal is this: That the learned Judge placed the onus of proving that the land was zerait on the plaintiff, whereas, it is contended by the learned Vakil, that he ought to have placed it on the defendant. His argument being that when it is once admitted that the plaintiff was the zemindar then prima facie all the land belonged to him and he was entitled to possession of it till the contrary could be proved by those who claimed some title to the land. In this case it appears from the judgment of the Court of first instance that the land in question was situated on the western boundary of the defendant's holding. The dhar of the river Kamla on the western boundary is what the plaintiff now claims. It has now silted up. It ap...
Ganoda Sundari Chowdhrani Vs. Girish Chandra Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-07-1909
Reported in: 4Ind.Cas.400
1. This is an appeal in a suit instituted by the plaintiff for declaration of his title to a one-third share in certain property purchased by him from Rashmoni and her adopted son Purna Chandra Roy in the year 1896 (1303 B.S.). The other property in suit has not been alluded to in the argument on this appeal. Rashmoni was the daughter of Jugal Kishore who was one of three brothers. Both the lower Courts have given plaintiff a decree for the one-third share.2. In second appeal two contentions have been raised: first that the authority to adopt conferred on Rashmoni by her husband, by means of an 'Anumatipatra' has not been strictly proved; and secondly that the share of Jugal Kishore was not one-third but one-sixth in the lakhraj property in suit.3. It is true that the Anumatipatra was not produced in evidence, but in our opinion it was not necessary to prove that document. Purna Chandra Roy was taken in adoption by Rashmoni some thirty-four years ago and all parties including the defen...
Harendra Lal Roy Chowdhury Vs. Sm. Hari Dasi Debi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-07-1909
Reported in: 5Ind.Cas.844
1. The present applicant, comes before us under Rule 7, Order 45 of the new Code and asks us to extend time provided by that Rule within which the security for the costs of the respondents should be put in. It appears that the judgment of the High Court front which the appeal to His Majesty in Council is preferred was passed on the 3rd March 1909, and the application for leave to appeal was filed on the 12th May 1909, and the certificate was granted on the 10th of August 1909.2. The section provides that the costs must be deposited within six months from the date of the decree or within six weeks from the grant of the certificate. In this case six months from the date of the decree expired on the 3rd September 1909, and six weeks from the date of the grant of certificate on the 21st September 1909.3. In support of his application the petitioner has filed a petition giving the reasons for the delay in putting in the security. In paragraph 7 of the petition it is stated that the petition...
Banga Hadua and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-07-1909
Reported in: 5Ind.Cas.771a
1. The appellants in this case have all been convicted of rioting under Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code, and of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 read with Section 149. There is no doubt that there was a riot on the 8th March 1909, the day alleged, and that the accused were concerned in it, and there is not much doubt that Amiruddi the deceased man was killed in the course of it, but the first question to which we will direct our attention is whether it has been proved that the appellants took part in an unlawful assembly, since if that is not done the case against them has no foundation. The case put forward by the prosecution was as follows: There was a dispute between two bodies of zemindars as to some homestead land in the village of ITjanibari. The complainant's party had been in possession of part of it for rather more than a year before the date of the riot, and were then turned out of it by Banga, the first appellant, and his party. They brought a...
Bhugwan Das Vs. Raghunath Sahai
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-07-1909
Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.563
1. In this case the learned District Judge affirming the decision, of the Munsif has dismissed the plaintiff's suit for rent on the ground that the plaintiff has not had his name registered under the Land Registration Act and is, therefore, by the provisions of Section 78 of that Act, precluded from recovering rent from the defendant. But the defendant took a lease from the plaintiff and in the lease there is a contract by which the defendant undertakes to pay the plaintiff's rent. That being so it is contended by the appellant that it comes within Section 81 of the Land Registration Act which provides that nothing in Section 78 shall be held to interfere with the conditions of any written contract. The provisions, therefore, of Section 78 do not have the effect of preventing the defendant from being liable to pay rent to the plaintiff notwithstanding his name is not registered; because, he pays it under a written contract which is expressly excepted from the provisions of Section 78 b...
Sheikh Kadir Bax Vs. Sheikh Ismail Mistry
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-06-1909
Reported in: 4Ind.Cas.493
1. We are invited in these Rules to set aside the judgment and decree of the Small Cause Court Judge of Sealdah in two suits for rent of land. The learned Vakil for the Petitioner has contended that under Article 8 of the second Schedule of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, the Small Cause Court Judge had no jurisdiction to try these suits. This contention is obviously well founded. In fact from an examination of the plaints it is clear that they were filed before the Munsif, and same officer of the Court appears to have treated the plaints as if they were plaints in Small Cause Court suits. This was a mistake which was overlooked by both the parties. The Court, however, could not have jurisdiction to try these suits merely because no objection was taken by the parties. The result, therefore, is that these Rules must be made absolute, the decree of the Small Cause Court Judge set aside; and the cases sent to the Munsif in order that he may try them as regular suits. The costs of t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »