Kolkata Court May 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.
Emperor Vs. Annada Charan Thakur
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-05-1909
Reported in: (1909)ILR36Cal629
Caspersz, J.1. This is a Reference under Section 307 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the Sessions Judge of Rajshaye who disagreed with the verdict of the Jury acquitting the accused persons, Annada Charan and Pratap Shaha. The charges against the accused Annada were in respect of offences punishable under Sections 302/114 and 392 of the Indian Penal Code, and against the accused Pratap under Sections 302 and 392 of the Code. The Jury, by a majority of four to one, acquitted the first accused, and by a majority of three to two acquitted the second accused on all the charges. One Kali Charan Thakur, the father of the accused Annada, died during the trial, and another accused, named Abdus Sobhan, was made an approver in the Court of the committing Magistrate, and he was examined as such in the Court of Session.2. Before dealing with the merits of this Reference, it will be convenient to dispose of two matters of law upon which the learned Counsel for the accused has made his submissi...
Beni Ram Sarugs Vs. Mahomed Abdullah
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-05-1909
Reported in: 2Ind.Cas.69
Mookerjee, J.1. This is an appeal on behalf of the defendant in an action commenced by the plaintiff for cancellation of an order made by the Assistant Settlement Officer of Sambalpore, on the 7th June 1906, under the Central Provinces Land Revenue Act (XVIII of 1881) and also for amendment of the Record of Rights based thereupon. The entry in question is to the effect that the plaintiff is liable to pay the defendant an assessed annual rent of Rs. 3-2 in respect of the disputed land. The case for the plaintiff is that one Kirtibas, who was Gaontia of village Mahomed Larpank within which the disputed land is situated, sold the village to the father of the defendant on the 18th February 1867. Under the conveyance a right was reserved to Kirtibas to hold the disputed parcel in perpetuity without payment of rent, and the transferee was to payout of the profits of the Village the rent that might be assessed in future. On the 24th April 1898, the plaintiff purchased the right, title and int...
indra Chand Bothra and ors. Vs. Khaja Mahammad Gowhar Ali Khan
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-05-1909
Reported in: 2Ind.Cas.168
Richardson, J.1. The plaintiff seeks for recovery of possession of a small plot of land adjourning a dharamsala. He is the proprietor of a fifteen annas 6 dams share of the mauza in which the land lies and he made the proprietors of the remaining share defendants.2. Under a pattah, bearing a date corresponding, as I was told, to the 12th June 1872, the plaintiff leased to the late Rai Dhanpat Singh Bahadur certain land, 1 bigha 3 cattahs in area, for the purpose of building thereon a dharamsala. A dharamsala, was accordingly constructed, of which the defendants first party are now the trustees, and the defendant second party is the manager. The disputed land adjoins the dharamsala on the east. The Munsif who tried the case in the first instance made a local enquiry and found that the boundaries of the disputed land were correctly given in the plaint and that the area of the land was 6 cottahs. It is now conceded by the principal defendants that the land is not covered by the pattah gra...
Emperor Vs. Annada Charan Thakur and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-05-1909
Reported in: 2Ind.Cas.497
Caspersz, J.1. This is a reference under Section 307 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the Sessions Judge of Rajshahye, who disagreed with the verdict of, the jury acquitting the accused persons, Armada Charan Thakur and Protap Shah. The charges against the accused Annada were in respect of offences punishable under Sections 302, 114 and 392 of the Indian Penal Code, and, against the accused Protap under Sections 302 and 392 of the Code. The jury by a majority of 4 to 1, acquitted the first accused, and by a majority of 3 to 2 acquitted the second accused on all the charges. One Kali Charan Thakur, the father of the accused Annada, died during the trial, and another accused, named Abdus Sobhan, was made an approver in the Court of the committing Magistrate, and he was examined as such in the Court of Sessions.2. Before dealing with the merits of this reference it will be convenient to dispose of two matters of law upon which the learned Counsel for the accused has made his submissio...
Hem Chandra Kar and ors. Vs. Mathur Santhal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-05-1909
Reported in: 17Ind.Cas.78
1. A criminal case against the petitioners is pending on the file of the Sub-Deputy Magistrate of Bishnupur (Babu K.C. Haldar), who disposed of another case, apparently relating to the same dispute between the parties on the 21st December 1908. This Rule is for transfer of the said case. Cause is shown by Babu Srish Chandra Chowdhury, Junior Government Pleader, and by Babu Jnanendra Nath Sarkar, Vakil.2. The Rule was issued for the transfer of the pending case on the ground that the Sub-Deputy Magistrate had arrived at findings adverse to the petitioners in the case disposed of by him on the 21st December 1908.3. Babu Dasarathi Sanyal, who appears in support of this Rule, has informed us that the Sub-Deputy Magistrate did not pay any heed to the telegram which was sent by him intimating the direction given by this Court to stay further proceedings. A supplementary affidavit, with the original telegram, has been put in, and the learned Vakil has called our attention to two cases in the ...
Gangadhar Sarkar and ors. Vs. Khaja Abdul Ajij and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-04-1909
Reported in: 2Ind.Cas.77
1. This was a suit brought o establish the title of plaintiffs Nos. 4 to 8 in a 12 anna share of a patni taluk, and to set aside an auction sale of the said patni laluk on the ground that it was illegal, based on fraud and without jurisdiction. The origin-al plaintiffs Nos. 1 to 3, who claimed to be entitled to a 1 anna share in the patni taluk were afterwards made defendants, and the suit continued at the instance of plaintiffs Nos. 4 to 8. The sale took place on 1st Jaisto 1310 B.S. (corresponding to 15th May 1903) and the suit was filed on 5th October 1904, considerably more than one year after. The only point for our determination is whether the suit is barred by the law of limitation. The Munsif held that the suit was instituted within one year from the date when plaintiffs came to know of the sale, arid that it was, therefore, not barred. In this he was not correct, as under article 12 of schedule II of the Limitation Act, 1877, time begins to run from the date when the sale is c...
Finlay Muir and Co. Vs. Radhakissen Gopikissen
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-03-1909
Reported in: (1909)ILR36Cal736,3Ind.Cas.185
Harington, J.1. The plaintiffs' claim is for the price of goods bargained and sold; the defendants plead that the action does not lie and that the goods were not shipped under the contract.2. The facts which have been proved or admitted before me are that by a contract dated March 7th, 1908, the plaintiffs agreed to sell, and the defendants to buy 15 bales of grey C. B. dhooties of the size and quality described in the contract at Re. 1 per pair; shipment to be in April-May 1908; delivery to be taken within 90 days of arrival; interest to be charged at 12 per cent, on payments made after 45 days from actual delivery.3. A number of bales of dhooties arrived in the Sections Sparta on April 15th fifteen bales out of this lot were selected by the plaintiffs' sale-master to be delivered to the defendants in fulfilment of this contract and were divided into two lots, eight bales for the April shipment and seven bales for the May shipment.4. Out of the first lot of eight bales, the defendants...
Sheikh Latifar Rahaman and ors. Vs. A.H. Forbes
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-03-1909
Reported in: 5Ind.Cas.783
Doss, J.1. This appeal arises out of an action for ejectment of the defendants from two holdings, one measuring 575 highas held at a rental of Rs. 51-12 and the other 120 bighas held at a rental of Rs. 8.2. The holdings are situated in a tract known as chariramma or pasture lands in mouzahs Basantpur, one of the mouzahs comprised in the plaintiff's zemindari. The plaintiff based his suit on the ground that the defendants are tenants from year to year, that their tenancy is determinable by a six months' notice to quit and that their tenancy has been determined by services of such notice.3. The defendants, on the other hand, deny service of notice. They plead that they have occupancy rights in the holdings, or at all events, such rights in them by local usage that they cannot be evicted.4. The learned District Judge has held that service of the notices upon the defendants has been proved; that they are not raiyats as defined in Section 5 of the Bengal Tenancy Act and consequently cannot ...
R.H. Wernicke and ors. and the Amalgamated Tea Estates Co., Ld. Vs. th ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-03-1909
Reported in: 2Ind.Cas.562
Doss, J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment of the District Judge of Purneah and Darjeeling, dated the 25th May 1907, determining on a reference under Section 19 of the Land Acquisition Act, the amount of compensation payable for land acquired for public purposes. The declaration is dated the 31st January 1906] and was published on the 7th February 1906, the purpose of the acquisition being the extension of the rifle range in the villages of Lebong' and Pandan at Darjeeling. The claimants are (1) the owners of the Pandan Tea Estate, and (2) The Amalgamated Tea Co., Ld., as proprietors of the Lebong Minchi Tea Estate.2. The area of land acquired belonging to the claimants, first party, is 11 acres 2 roods 30 poles of which 7 acres 1 rood 2 poles is under tea.3. The area of land acquired belonging to the claimants, second party, is 2 acres 1 rood 30 poles of which 2 roods is under tea. The Deputy Commissioner of Darjeeling valued the tea land at Rs. 400 per acre and the waste land at ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›