Kolkata Court July 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.
Kailash Chandha Das Vs. Nityananda Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-27-1909
Reported in: 3Ind.Cas.21
1. In this appeal, which is directed against a preliminary decree in-a suit for partition of joint properties, two objections have been urged on behalf of the appellant, namely, first, that the Subordinate' Judge ought not to have directed a partition till the plaintiff had included in the suit properties jointly owned by the plaintiff and the defendant as well as other parties secondly, that the appellant was perjudiced as he had not Been allowed opportunity to adduce evidence.2. So far as the first of these contentions is concerned, we may observe that it is opposed to a series of decisions of this Court amongst which reference may he made to those of Radhakanta Shaha v. Bipro Das Roy 1 C.L.J. 40 and Jogendra Chandra Shaha Chowdhary v. Sris Chandra Shaha Chowdhary S.A. No. 1788 of 1907 decided by Brett and Fletcher, JJ. These cases lay down the proposition that a suit for a partition of a portion of a joint estate; is. maintainable when such portion is the only property held jointly ...
RamdIn Ojha Vs. Jodhan Prosad Singh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-27-1909
Reported in: 3Ind.Cas.29
1. This appeal arises as follows. The respondent is a four anna co-sharer in a certain estate : and brought a rent suit against appellant No. 1 joining his co-sharers as defendants and claiming 16 annas of the rent due. The suit was decreed against the tenant defendants and it was ordered that the 4 anna share of the present respondent should be shown, and that he should get the entire costs of the suit. On appeal this decision was upheld by the Sub-Judge, and it was added to make it more clear it is farther ordered that a decree for the entire 16 annas rent...be passed jointly in favour of the plaintiff as also in favour of the pro forma defendants, the maliks, that out of that the plaintiff do get to the extent of 4 annas and the other maliks the pro forma defendants do get the remaining 12 annas.' The decree was drawn up accordingly, and execution was taken out only for a 4 annas share.2. The judgment-debtor thereupon made an objection under Section 214 Civil Procedure Code on the g...
Hari Nath Biswas and ors. Vs. Debendra Nath Biswas
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-27-1909
Reported in: 5Ind.Cas.771
1. We are invited in this Rule to transfer a suit pending in the Court of the first Munsif of Krishnagar to the Court of the Subordinate Judge of the same place. The petitioner alleges that the suits arise out of transactions closely connected together and that the evidence both oral and documentary to be relied upon in the cases is exactly the same. Under these circumstances, it is obvious that the suits ought to be tried together.2. It is argued, however, on behalf of the opposite party that this Court has no jurisdiction to make an order under Section 24 of the Code of 1908, because an application was made to the District Judge for the same purpose and was refused. The learned Vakil contends that under Section 24, the High Court and the District Court have concurrent jurisdiction and as the District Court has refused to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it, the jurisdiction vested in the High Court has been taken away. There is manifestly no foundation for this contention. Section...
Prakash Kumar Mukerji Vs. Harvey
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-26-1909
Reported in: (1909)ILR36Cal1021
Fletcher, J.1. In this suit the plaintiff, Prakash Kumar Mukerjee, who is a little boy of about seven years of age and a son of Panchanan Mukerji, an officer of the Appellate Side of this Court, sues one A.D. Fordyce Harvey to recover damages for injuries he sustained by reason of being bitten by the defendant's dogs.2. It appears that Mr. Harvey has always kept dogs, and in August last he purchased a dog of the breed known as 'Great Danes,' two of which breed were produced in Court and which are dogs of great size. In September one Mr. Dutt came to Calcutta and Mr. Harvey bought another 'Great Dane' from him. Mr. Dutt had three puppies of a similar breed of the age of about five months and wished to dispose of them as he was' about to return to America, and to oblige him Mr. Harvey also bought the three puppies, and thus at the date when the plaintiff says he was bitten, Mr. Harvey had five 'Great Danes.' These dogs were left in the charge of one Deno, a sweeper, employed by Mr. Harve...
Mulluk Chand Das and anr. Vs. Satish Chandra Das and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-26-1909
Reported in: 3Ind.Cas.306a
1. This is an appeal on behalf of the defendants in an action for rent-The plaintiffs-respondents claimed rent in respect of an area of 10 kanis 19 gundas and 18 tils for which, they alleged in their plaint, the defendants were liable to pay (at the rate of Its. 10-8 per kani) an annual rent of Rs. 115-4 and cesses. The defendants resisted the claim, substantially on the grounds, namely, first that they were liable to pay rent, not at the rate claimed, but at the rate of Rs. 99-12 annas per year under a registered kabuliat executed on the 4th June 1894, and secondly, that they had paid rent up to the year 1312 at the rate of Rs. 99-12.2. In the Court of first instance the plaintiffs appear to have attempted to prove that the lands in respect of which rent was claimed were comprised in four tenancies and in order to establish this they called upon the defendants to produce their rent-receipts which showed that the rent of Rs. 115-4 had been paid in different sums, in respect of four dis...
Prokash Kumar Mookerjee Vs. A.D.F. Harvey
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-26-1909
Reported in: 3Ind.Cas.785
Fletcher, J.1. In this suit the plaintiff, Prokash Kumar Mookerjee, who is a little boy of about seven years of age and a son, of Punchanan Mookerjee, an officer on the Appellate Side of this Court, sues one A. D. Fordyce Harvey to recover damages for injuries he sustained by reason of being bitten by the defendant's dogs.2. It appears that Mr. Harvey has always kept dogs, and in August last, he purchased a dog of the breed known as Great Danes, two of which breed were produced in Court and which are dogs of great size. In September, one Mr. Duft came to Calcutta and Mr. Harvey bought another Great Dane from him. Mr. Duft had three puppies of a similar breed of the age of about five months and wished to dispose of them as he was about to return to America; and to oblige him, Mr. Harvey also bought the three puppies, and thus at the date when the plaintiff says he was bitten, Mr. Harvey had five Great Danes. These dogs were left in the charge of one Deno, a sweeper, employed by Mr. Harv...
Malik Pratap Singh Vs. Khan Mahomed
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1909
Reported in: (1909)ILR36Cal994
Coxe and Ryves, JJ.1. This is a Rule on the Chief Presidency Magistrate of Calcutta and the opposite party to show cause why the order of discharge of Khan Mahomed, passed by the learned Fourth Presidency Magistrate, dated the 27th May last, should not be set aside and a further inquiry ordered.2. On behalf of Khan Mahomed it has been argued that this Court should not interfere under the Charter Act in the circumstances of this case, and that it has no power under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code to order further inquiry in a case in which a Presidency Magistrate has discharged an accused person, and reliance has been placed on three rulings of this Court to which we shall refer later.3. We think it must be conceded that we can only interfere, if at all, under Section 439 of the Code. There is here no question of jurisdiction. If the Magistrate has erred, his error is merely one of law. It was held in Tej Ram v. Harsukh (1875) I.L.R. 1 All. 101, which was followed in Corpo...
Malik Protab Singh Vs. Khan Mahomed
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1909
Reported in: 3Ind.Cas.861
1. This is a Rule on the Chief Presidency Magistrate of Calcutta and the Opposite Party to show cause why the order of discharge of Khan Mahomed passed by the learned Fourth Presidency Magistrate, dated the 27th of May last, should not be set aside and a further enquiry ordered.2. On behalf of Khan Mahomed it has been argued that this Court should not interfere under the Charter Act in the circumstances of this case, and that it has no power, (under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code) to order further enquiry in a case in which a Presidency Magistrate has discharged an accused person; and reliance has been placed on three rulings of this Court to which we shall refer later.3. We think it must be conceded that we can only interfere, if at all, under Section 439 of the Code. There is here no question of jurisdiction. If the Magistrate has erred, his error is merely one of law. It was held in Tej Ram v. Harsukh A. 101 which was followed in Corporation of Calcutta v. Bhupati Roy...
Emperor Vs. Hamid Ali
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-23-1909
Reported in: (1910)ILR37Cal24
Lawrence H. Jenkins, C.J. and Caspersz, J.1. This is an appeal by the Government from the acquittal of three men, Hamid Ali, Serajuddin and Akkil Ali, who were charged under Section 9 of the Opium Act (I of 1878) with possessing opium. The charge of possession rests on the fact that it was in a boat, in which these three men and another were. For the purposes of an offence under Section 9, Clause (c), nothing is necessary beyond possession of the opium. There is no particular frame of mind required, so that what we have to consider is, first of all, whether these three accused or any one of them was in possession of the opium. As against two of the accused, that is to say, Hamid Ali and Akkil Ali, there is, I think, a complete failure on the part of the prosecution to show possession, for the evidence so far as it goes is that they were not owners of the boat, nor jointly interested with Serajuddin in any venture as an incident of which we might attribute to them possession of the opiu...
In Re: Official Assignee's Commission
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-23-1909
Reported in: (1909)ILR36Cal990,4Ind.Cas.697
Fletcher, J.1. This case has been mentioned on the application of the Official Assignee to speak to the minutes of an order made in Insolvency Proceedings directing the Official Assignee to sell certain immoveable properties which are subject to a mortgage. The order was made on the application of the mortgagee with the consent of the Official Assignee. The reason that the Official Assignee has required that the minutes should be spoken to is on account of the Chief Clerk having drawn the minutes of the order as allowing the Official Assignee's commission only on the amount coming to the insolvent's estate, whereas the Official Assignee claims that he is entitled to commission out of the insolvent's estate on the full value of the property.2. The matter is one of considerable importance. In some cases the commission that has been paid to the Official Assignee in respect of the sale of the immoveable property of an insolvent out of the insolvent's estates when the same has been subject ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »