Kolkata Court November 1910 Judgments
Raja Ranjit Singh Bahadur Vs. Moharaj Bahadur Singh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-30-1910
Reported in: 9Ind.Cas.47
1. This is an appeal in an action for recovery of money claimed by the plaintiff-appellant under a putni lease. It appears that on the 2nd March 1855, Rani Phul Kumari, the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiff, granted to one Krishna Chander Banerjee, now represented by the defendants, a patni lease of a considerable tract of land at a consolidated rent of Rs. 12,350. At the foot of the qabuliat executed by the lessee the following statement occurs: 'I shall manage for the daily cooking of the bhog of the above-mentioned Thakur with dry wood and wild trees of the said mahals in the same manner as they are being done from before; should any laches on my part in this respect be found by you, I shall pay from my own pocket the costs that will be incurred for wood etc., for the cooking of the bhog.' The defendants have failed to supply wood in the terms of this agreement, and the plaintiff now sues them for the price of the articles supplied by himself for the worship of the idol. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Dina Nath Das and ors. Vs. Ganesh Chandra Saha and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-30-1910
Reported in: 9Ind.Cas.2
Caspersz, J.1. The land involved in this litigation is a doba or ditch covered by dag 707. The plaintiffs sought to recover possession of the doba on the allegation that it was their khas patit land. The defendant, on the other hand, set up a jote right in respect of that plot, and asserted that they held their tenancy under the plaintiffs for which they paid rent, at first, Rs. 4-2 which was subsequently increased to Rs. 4-8, the 6 annas representing the rent of the plot added to the original area of the holding. There was a previous rent suit between the parties in which the plaintiffs sought to recover rent at the original jama of Rs. 4-2, and that suit was decreed at that rate, but there is a concluding observation in the judgment of the appellate Court that the question of land appertaining to the holding will be left open.2. The principal piece of evidence on the side of the defendants, then, as now, is Exhibit B, a dakhila (rent receipt) purporting to have been granted by the pl...
Tag this Judgment!Raimala Biprajugi Vs. Shiba Sundari Chowdhuri
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-30-1910
Reported in: 16Ind.Cas.351
1. This is an appeal on behalf of the defendants in an action in ejectment. The plain tiffs-respondents commenced this action on the ground that the first defendant was a tenant-at-will and that his tenancy had been terminated by a valid notice to quit. The suit was resisted by the original tenant as also by the third and fourth defendants, who were respectively the mortgagee and purchaser from her. Their defence in' substance was two-fold, namely, first, that the first defendant had acquired a right of occupancy in the land which had been let out to her for agricultural purposes; and secondly, that the notice to quit was not valid in law. The Courts below have decreed the suit and made a decree for ejectment against all the defendants. In support of the appeal, two grounds have been urged; namely, first, that the first defendant had a permanant transferable interest in the land, and, secondly, that if her interest was of a temporary nature, it had not been terminated by a legal notice...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Sobhan Vs. Monab Ali and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-24-1910
Reported in: 14Ind.Cas.453
1. We are invited in this Rule to set aside an order under Section 174 of the Bengal Tenancy Act on the ground that it has been made without jurisdiction. The circumstances under which the order has been made are not disputed. On the 15th April 1908, two persons of the name of Jitendra Narain Roy and Jotindra Narain Roy instituted a suit for rent against four persons as defendants. As the defendants did not enter appearance, the plaintiffs obtained an ex parte decree against them. The first three defendants subsequently made an application to set aside the ex parte decree under Section 108 of the Code of Civil Procedure of 1882, and were successful. What the precise effect of the order was, has been the subject of discussion at the bar. It has been suggested, on the one hand, that the effect of the order was to set aside the decree for the benefit of all the defendants; it has been contended, on the other hand, that the effect of the order was merely to set aside the ex parte decree fo...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: AbiruddIn Ahmed
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-22-1910
Reported in: (1911)ILR38Cal309
Mookerjee and Sharfuddin, JJ.1. This is an application by one Abiruddin Ahmed, who was formerly a muktear and practised as such in the Criminal Courts at Rampore Boalia in the district of Rajshaye. On the 28th January 1903 he was dismissed by this Court, under Section 12 of the Legal Practitioners Act of 1879, on the ground that he had been convicted of a criminal offence, namely, an offence under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code, implying a defect of character, which rendered him unfit to be a muktear. On the 26th July 1910 the present application was made with a view to the reinstatement of the petitioner, on the ground that since his dismissal he had borne an honourable character and had suffered considerable pecuniary loss. The application is supported by certificates as to the character of the petitioner and his present circumstances. These certificates are signed, amongst others, by the Junior Government Pleader of Rajshaye, members of the legal profession in that district, a...
Tag this Judgment!Hossainara Begam Vs. Rahimannessa Begam
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-22-1910
Reported in: (1911)ILR38Cal342
Mookerjee and Sharfuddin, JJ.1. This is an appeal on behalf of the defendants in a suit to enforce two mortgage securities. There is no controversy is to the circumstances under which the plaintiffs seek to recover the disputed amount, and they may be briefly narrated. On the 9th June 1894, Akbar Shiko, the father of the two defendants, executed a mortgage bond in favour of one Amir Jan. The principal sum advanced was Rs. 200 and carried interest at the rate of 24 per cent, per annum. The loan was repayable on the 16th October 1894. On the 24th September 1894, the mortgagor executed a second mortgage in favour of Ali Ashgar and Ali Naki as security for a loan of Rs. 200 which carried interest at the same rate, and was made repayable on the 14th March 1896. On the 17th February 1896, Amir Jan, the first mortgagee, transferred his security to the second mortgagees Ali Ashgar and Ali Naki. The result was that the second mortgagees thus became the holders of both the first and second secur...
Tag this Judgment!Gobinda Chandra Addy Vs. Corporation of Calcutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-10-1910
Reported in: (1911)ILR38Cal268
Holmwood and Fletcher, JJ.1. This was a Rule calling upon the Municipal Magistrate to show cause why the fine on the petitioner should not be set aside on the ground that the drain called the common house-drain belongs to the landlord of the bustee and is not a place lawfully set apart for the discharge of drainage from the premises of the petitioner, and that the landlord is the person against whom, proceedings should be taken in respect of the drainage of the petitioner's house.2. We have heard the learned vakil in support of the Rule and the learned vakil who shows cause for the Corporation in reply, and we are clearly of opinion that Section 299 does not operate against the petitioner in the present case. We are referred to Section 298, but that has merely a historical interest, for it is only alleged that it is under that section that this common bustee drainage was originally effected. That arrangement appears to have been that every hut in the bustee which had a surface drain co...
Tag this Judgment!Manomohan Ghose Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-07-1910
Reported in: (1911)ILR38Cal253
Holmwood, J.1. I have had the advantage of reading the judgment which my learned brother is about to deliver, and I find myself in agreement with him that the present appellant, the printer and publisher of the Karmayogin, cannot be convicted under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code on the article which we have before us in this case.2. It is unfortunate that of a series of articles alleged to have been written by one and the same hand the prosecution should have selected the one which on the face of it appears the least amenable to a charge of sedition, and it is doubly unfortunate that the case should have been so inadequately tried in the Lower Court. It is true that under the law, the printer and publisher of a seditious article can be punished merely on proof that the article is calculated to excite feelings of hatred, dislike, ill-will, enmity or hostility towards the Government established by law in British India, but that renders it all the more incumbent on the prosecution ...
Tag this Judgment!Khagendra Nath Mitter Vs. Bhupendra NaraIn Dutt
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-07-1910
Reported in: (1911)ILR38Cal296
Holmwood, J.1. This was a Rule calling upon the Municipal Magistrate to show cause why his order, dated the 30th July 1910, should not be set aside on the ground that it was passed without jurisdiction. The order is in respect of a wall nearly forty feet high, which has been erected by the petitioner between his premises and the adjoining premises of the complainant, 79 and 80, Bechu Chatterjee's Street. There was a wall to mark the boundary on approximately the same site before, but this was only a low wall; and met with no objection. It is contended by the complainant that the new wall has partly encroached on his land, but with this we have nothing to do, as that, like many other questions K that have been discussed in this case, is a purely civil matter.2. I may say, at the outset, that I most strongly deprecate the use of the Municipal Act for the purpose of interfering in any way with the rights of private ownership beyond those limited powers which the. Corporation have obtained...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›