Kolkata Court August 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.
Sagar Chandra Mandal Vs. Dwarka Nath Mandal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-1909
Reported in: 3Ind.Cas.380
1. This appeal is directed against a decree of the District Judge of 24-Pargannahs, by which he has refused probate of a will alleged to have been executed by one Uttom Mandal on the 29th July 1901. The testator died on the 10th January 1907 and on the 23rd April following his nephew Sagar Chandra Mandal applied for probate as executor by implication. The Court below has refused probate on two grounds, namely, first, that the document propounded is not a testamentary instrument, and secondly, that although, the testator is proved to have put his mark on the first sheet and the attesting witnesses are shown to have signed the last sheet, as the intermediate sheets were not signed or initialled, there is no guarantee that the document is, as a whole, the genuine will of the testator. Both these grounds have been challenged before us in appeal and, in our opinion, successfully.2. As to the true character of the instrument propounded by the appellant, we think-there can be no reasonable do...
Gadadhar Bhatta Vs. Lalit Kumar Chatterji and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-1909
Reported in: 4Ind.Cas.434
1. This appeal arises out of a proceeding for apportionment of compensation awarded under the Land Acquisition Act. The dispute is between the landlords and their tenant, and their rights are regulated by a lease granted on the 23rd June 1891, which was subsequently varied by another lease on the 3rd January 1893. By the original lease the rent was fixed and was described as not liable to enhancement or reduction. At the same time it was stated that neither the lessee nor his heirs would ever be able to make gift, sell or alienate any portion of the land or to encumber it in any way. The lease further contained an express covenant to the effect that if the land was acquired or required by Government or by the Railway Company or by any other Company or Corporation, the landlord would get the value of the land and all fixtures and structures erected by him, and that the tenant would obtain the value merely of the fixtures and structures erected at his expense, and that no claim or demand...
Edward Dalgleish and ors. Vs. RamdIn Singh Chowdhury and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-1909
Reported in: 5Ind.Cas.67
1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs for rent. It appears that the defendants are tenants of the plaintiffs with respect to certain villages and that the plaintiffs are also tenants of the defendants in respect of certain lands in those villages. The suit was filed for the rent due to the plaintiffs for the years 1311, 1812 and 1313. The defendants pleaded that the rent due from the plaintiffs to them for the years 1309 and 1310 must be taken into account by virtue of an arrangement which is set out in paragraph 4 of their written statement. The arrangement, according to the defendants, was that the plaintiffs would receive on account from time to time money as rent of the ticca property from the defendants and subsequently at the time of adjustment they would set-off the money due to the defendants on account of the rents of the lands which they (plaintiffs) held as their tenants. In the first Court, the Subordinate Judge raised the issue: 'Are the defendants ...
Kamalapati Banerjee Vs. Bejoy Lal Roy Chowdhury and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-19-1909
Reported in: 3Ind.Cas.291
1. The events which led to the litigation out of which the present appeal arises lie in a narrow compass and do not admit of any doubt or dispute. On the 27th November 1887, one Ashutosh Banerjee executed a mortgage by way of conditional sale in favour of Harendra Krishna Mukherjee. The principal was stated in the deed to be Rs. 7,000 and was to carry interest at the rate of 12 per cent, per annum. The due date was specified to be the 12th April 1894. The mortgagor died on the 20th March 1892 and the mortgagee died towards the end of December 1895. On the 23rd June 1905 two of the four sons of the mortgagee transferred their interest in the mortgage debt to one Bejoy Lal Chowdhury and on the 13th August 1905 the assignee along with the other two sons commenced the present action against the two sons of the mortgagor for foreclosure and possession of the mortgaged premises. Subsequently, on objection taken by the defendants as to the genuineness of the assignment of the mortgage, the as...
Lakhpati Koer and anr. Vs. Harkho Singh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-18-1909
Reported in: 3Ind.Cas.342
1. This is an appeal from two orders of the third-Subordinate Judge of Patna made in execution proceedings for the realization of a mortgage-decree by sale of the mortgaged properties, settling the valuation to be published in the sale proclamation of the properties to be sold. On objection made by the judgment-debtor, he enquired into the matter. The materials he had before him included certain Road Cess Valuations and some oral evidence produced by the judgment-debtor. On considering these, we see no reason for disagreeing with the conclusions at which he has arrived. In several cases the Road Cess papers may be taken as showing a difference from the values assessed sometimes one way sometimes the other, but they afford weak ground for any exact calculations and the difference between the results allowed or arrived at by the lower Court and those suggested to us on behalf of the appellant do not make out any good cause for appeal. The most important oral evidence taken by the Judge c...
Srimati Mathuria Debi Vs. Shib Dyal Singh Hazari
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-18-1909
Reported in: 3Ind.Cas.430
1. A preliminary objection arises with regard to this appeal that no appeal lies against the order of the Subordinate Judge dated the 17th June 1909, which is only an order that a Receiver should be appointed and not an order appointing a Receiver. We have referred the learned Counsel for the appellant to the case of Birajan Kooer v. Ram Churanhall Mahata 7 C. 719 : 9 C.L.R. 303 in which an opinion was expressed by a Bench of this Court that in such a case no appeal lies. The learned Counsel for the appellant, therefore, asks our leave to be allowed to withdraw this appeal and his request is not opposed by the learned Counsel for the respondent provided his costs are paid.2. We, accordingly, order that the appeal is allowed to be withdrawn. The appellant must pay the respondent, costs of the appeal. We fix the hearing fee at 15 gold mohurs.Rule No. 2431 of 1909.3. This rule which was issued on the 24th June 1909 will, under the circumstances, also be discharged. We make no order as to ...
In Re: Abinash Chandra Moitra
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-17-1909
Reported in: (1910)ILR37Cal173,5Ind.Cas.406
Chitty and Vincent, JJ.1. This is an application to us to review our judgment of the 28th May 1909, by which we ordered the dismissal of the pleader; Abinash Chandra Moitra, who was charged with professional misconduct. The petition for review contains eight grounds, but none of these have been seriously pressed by the learned Counsel for the applicant. The first ground that the District Judge had no jurisdiction to hold the enquiry and report was given up. The learned Counsel did suggest that we had taken an erroneous view of the facts in one or two unimportant respects, principally with regard to the withdrawal of the suit against Bahadur Mollah by Abinash Chandra Moitra; but after hearing his arguments with regard to those points, we do not see any reason to go back upon the conclusions at which we arrived.2. The main ground which was urged before us was that this Division Bench was not properly constituted and authorised to deal with this reference. It was suggested that this might...
Satya Kumar Banerjee Vs. Satya Kirpal Banerjee and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-17-1909
Reported in: 3Ind.Cas.247
1. On the 30th May 1897, Satya Doyal Banerjee, a Hindu resident of Tebnipara in the District of Hooghly, died possessed of an estate of considerable value in respect of which he had made a testamentary disposition on the 11th January 1897. He left a mother, a widow, three sons and four daughters. On the 14th August 1897, his first two sons, defendants in the present, suit, took out probate of the will of which they were the executors. The third son who at the time of the death of his father was an infant, attained majority in October 1905. In May 1904, the two major sons and the infant son represented by his father-in-law made a partition of a considerable portion of the immovable property left by the deceased. It was arranged between the parties at the time that the private partition would be subsequently affirmed by a decree of Court and that meanwhile the parties were to take and continue in separate possession of the properties partitioned. The plaintiff took possession of lot No. ...
Hem Chandra Ghosh Vs. Durga Pada Neogi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-16-1909
Reported in: 3Ind.Cas.435
1. The point raised in this appeal is concluded by the decision of this Court in the case of Dwarka Nath Biswas v. Kedar Nath Biswas (1909) 2 Ind. Cas. 1. It is conceded that on the date on which the plaint was presented to the Court of the Subordinate Judge, the suit was in time. The Court granted time to the plaintiff till the 8th August 1906 to amend the valuation and to put in additional Court-fees. That order was duly carried out. No question of limitation, therefore, arises. The appeal fails and is dismissed with costs. We assess the hearing fee at two gold mohurs....
Makhanchora Sarkar Vs. Nisind Gonai and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-16-1909
Reported in: 3Ind.Cas.438
1. This appeal is directed against an order passed by the District Judge of Murshidabad by which he has set aside an execution sale on an application by the auction-purchaser. It appears that the sale took place on the 19th June 1907, when the property was purchased by the present respondent. On the 7th August 1907 he made an application under Section 313. of the Code of 1882, in which he stated the circumstances under which he had made his purchase. A number of execution cases was pending in the Court of the first Munsif in some of which the judgment-debtors were Nand Kishore Lal and his infant brother Krishna Gopal Lal and in others the judgment-debtor was Nand Kishore Lal alone. The sale took place in the course of execution in a case in which Nand Kishore Lal alone was the judgment-debtor. The petitioner stated that he was not aware that in this particular case Nand Kishore Lal alone was the judgment-debtor and that he was under the impression that in all the execution cases both t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »