Skip to content

Kolkata Court April 1910 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.

Apr 12 1910

Prayag Sahu and anr. Vs. Kasi Sahu and anr.

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Apr-12-1910

Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.258

Chatterjee, J.1. The main question of law raised in this case is whether a decree for costs passed against a Mitakshara father, who has failed to substantiate a claim made, to some property, is binding on his sons who have succeeded by right of survivorship on his death. It is contended that the debt in this case comes within the word danda or fine in text of Yajnnavalkya quoted in the Mitakshara Chapter VI, Section III, Verse 47, Tarkalankar's Edition, 'Nor is he bound to pay any unpaid fines or tolls or idle gifts' or within the meaning of ryubuharika' in the text of Ushanas which has been translated variously as not 'necessary' (for life) by Pandit Girish Chandra Tarkarlankar, as unusual or not sanctioned by law' by the learned Judges of the Bombay High Court in Durbar Durbar v. Khachar Harsur 32 B. 348 : 10 Bom. L.R. 297, as 'improper' by Syama Charan in Vybastha Tarpon, 3rd Edition, page 129.2. Words used by Hindu law-givers must be understood in the sense in which the authors may...


Apr 11 1910

Bahadoor Vs. the Secretary of State for India in Council

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Apr-11-1910

Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.343

1. This appeal is directed against a decree by which damages have been assessed for disturbance of a ferry in accordance with the directions given by this Court in its judgment in the case of Rameswar Singh v. Secretary of State for India 34 C. 470 : 11 C.W.N. 356 : 5 C.L.J. 669. It is not necessary for our present purposes to review the earlier history of this litigation. It is sufficient to state that the proceeding taken for the acquisition of lands on both sides of the river were irregular with the result that disturbance was caused in an entirely improper manner to the exercise of the franchise possessed by the plaintiff. It was suggested before us on behalf of the Secretary of State on the previous occasion that, if the suit was held to be maintainable, damages should be allowed to be assessed in the first instance by the Collector; and that the final decree might be made by, the Civil Court in view of the award made by the Collector. 'This procedure has been followed. The Collec...


Apr 11 1910

Sarajendra Krishna Deb Vs. Sannyasi Charan Ghosh and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Apr-11-1910

Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.357

1. In this Rule we are invited to set aside two orders, one made by the Court of first instance on the 15th 'July 1909 and the other by the Court of appeal below on the 19th'.Novemb9r 193.9. The petitioner before us sued certain persons as his tenants for arrears of rent. The case was fixed for hearing on the 15th July, 1909. On that date a person of the name of Anukul Chandra Hazra appeared and applied for leave to deposit the full amount of the claim with costs. The applicant was not a party to the suit and did not even apply to be placed on the record, but upon his application, the Court proceeded to record the following order: 'The purchaser of the land has paid into Court the entire amount claimed with costs. The plaintiff is directed to take the money in satisfaction of -his claim. The suit is dismissed'. The plaintiff then applied to the District Judge to set aside this order in the exercise of his re-visional powers under Section 153 of the Bengal Tenancy Act as the original Co...


Apr 08 1910

R.D. Mehta Vs. Gadadhar Rai

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Apr-08-1910

Reported in: (1910)ILR37Cal683

Brett and Sharfuddin, JJ.1. This appeal arises out of a case which appears to have been disposed of in both the lower Courts on the pleadings of the parties. The plaintiff sued to recover rents and royalties in respect of certain coal lands which had been originally leased out to one Banwari Lal Banerjee by a lease, dated the 23rd November 1895. Subsequently, on the 19th September 1899, a twelve-anna share in the property passed to defendant No. 1 at a sale in execution of a decree. The defendant No. 1, in his written statement, alleged that on the 19th May 1905, he, by a registered conveyance, transferred his interest in the twelve-anna share to defendant No. 2. It also appears from the judgments of the lower Courts that the plaintiffs admitted that subsequent to that transfer they received rents for 1311 from defendant No. 2. The present suit was brought to recover from defendants Nos. 1 and 2 the rent and royalties for the year 1312. Defendant No. 1 denied all liability for this ren...


Apr 08 1910

R.D. Mehta Vs. Gadadhar Rai and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Apr-08-1910

Reported in: 7Ind.Cas.198

1. This appeal arises out of a case which appears to have been disposed of in both the lower Courts on the pleadings of the parties, The plaintiffs, sued to recover rents and royalties in respect of certain coal lands which had been originally leased out to one Banwari Lal Banorjee by a lease, dated the 23rd November 1895. Subsequently on the 19th September 1899 a 12 annas share in the property passed to defendant No. I at a sale in execution of a decree. The defendant No. I in his written statement alleged that on the 19th May 1905 he by a registered conveyance transferred his interest in the 12 annas share to defendant No. 2. It also appears from the judgments of the lower Courts that the plaintiffs admitted that subsequent to that transfer they received rents for 1311 from defendant No. 2. The present suit was brought to recover from defendants Nos. 1 and 2 the rent and royalties for the year 1312. Defendant No. 1 denied all liability for this rent on the ground that his liability f...


Apr 05 1910

Felaram Roy and ors. Vs. Bagalanand Banerjee

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Apr-05-1910

Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.207

1. The present appeal arises out of a suit brought by the reversioner to set aside a permanent lease bearing date the 7th Chaitra 1294, executed in favour of the defendants by one Sudha Mukhi Debi, widow of one Hangeswar Roy. It appears that Sadha Mukhi Debi gave the defendants a permanent lease of a tank taking from them a selami of Rs. 125 and reserving an annual rent of eight annas only. On behalf of the plaintiff It is contended that the widow-has no right to execute such a lease and that, even if the debt for the payment of which the lease was given was a debt due from her husband, she could have raised the money out of the property by some other means.2. The Court of first instance was of opinion that the lease was brought about by fraud and that, on that account, it should be set aside. That Court accordingly decreed the plaintiffs suit with costs.3. On appeal, the lower appellate Court has reversed the finding of the Court of first instance as regards fraud and has held, as a f...


Apr 04 1910

Gopendra Chandra Mitter Vs. Taraprasanna Mukerjee

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Apr-04-1910

Reported in: (1910)ILR37Cal598

Brett and Sharfuddin, JJ.1. The present appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs as zemindars of lot Chanak against the defendants Nos. 1 and 2, the putnidars of 9 mouzahs included in that towji. The plaintiffs sought to recover khas possession of 201 bighas odd of resumed chowkidari chakran lands lying within those 9 mouzahs and for wasilat, or, in the alternative, if the defendants should be found entitled to retain possession of the lands, to recover fair and equitable rents of the lands from the defendants. The rent they claimed was Rs. 500 for the 201 bighas of land. The defendants Nos. 1 and 2, the putnidars, contended that they were by law entitled to the possession of the chaukidari chakran lands after their resumption by the Collector, and that the plaintiffs, as zemindars, could not demand a higher rent from them than the amount which was assessed by the Collector under Section 49 of Bengal Act VI of 1870. The lower Court has dismissed the plaintiffs' claim for k...


Apr 04 1910

Ram Chandra Singh Vs. Bhikhambar Singh

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Apr-04-1910

Reported in: (1910)ILR37Cal674

Brett and Sharfuddin, JJ.1. The present appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff to recover possession of lands which were given by way of khorposh or maintenance grant by Raja Madan Mohan Sinha, the grandfather of the plaintiff, to Hikim Gopal Sinha, the father of the defendants. Raja Madan Mohan Sinha had three sons, of whom the eldest was the plaintiff's father, and the second was Hikim Gopal Sinha, the father of the defendants. Under the custom observed in the Raj family of Joypore, the entire zemindary passed by the law of primogeniture, on the death of the Raja, to his eldest son, and grants by way of maintenance were made to the younger sons. Raja Madan Mohan died in 1858. The defendants father, the original grantee, Hikim Gopal Sinha, died in 1877, and the plaintiff's father, Raja Kasi Nath Sinha, died in 1885. The present suit was instituted on the 14th June 1905.2. The case for the plaintiff was that maintenance grants being for the support of the individual to wh...


Apr 04 1910

Gopendra Chandra Mitter and anr. Vs. Taraprasanna Mukerjee

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Apr-04-1910

Reported in: 7Ind.Cas.790

1. The present appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs as zemindars of plot Chanak against the defendants Nos. 1 and 2, the putnidars of 9 mouzahs included in that towzi. The plaintiffs sought to recover khas possession of 201 bighas odd of resumed chowkidari chakran lands lying within those 9 mouzahs and for wasilat, of, in he alternative, if the defendants should be found entitled to retain possession of the lands, to recover fair and equitable rents of the lauds from the defendants. The rent they claimed was Rs. 500 for the 201 bighas of land. The defendants Nos. 1 and 2, the putnidars, contended that they were by law entitled to the possession of the chaukidari chakran lands after their resumption by the Collector, and that the plaintiffs, as zemindars, could not demand a higher rent from them than the amount which was assessed by the Collector under Section 49 of Bengal Act VI of 1870. The lower Court has dismissed the plaintiffs' claim for khas possession of the lan...


Apr 04 1910

Ram Chandra Singh and ors. Vs. Raja Sri Sri Bhikambar Singh

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Apr-04-1910

Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.339

1. The present appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff to recover possession of lands which were given by way of khorposh or maintenance grant by Raja Madan Mohun Sinha, the grand-father of the plaintiff, to Hikim Gopal Sinha, the father of the defendants. Raja Madan Mohun Sinha had three sons of whom the eldest was the plaintiff's father and the second was Hikim Gopal Sinha, the father of the defendants. Under the custom observed in the Raj Family of Joypore, the entire zamindary passed by the law of primogeniture, on the death of the Raja, to his eldest son and grants by way of maintenance were made to the younger sons. Raja Madan died in 1858. The defendants' father, the original grantee, Hikim Gopal Sinha died in 1877 and the plaintiff's father Raja Kasi Nath. Sinha died in 1885, The present suit was instituted on the 14th June 1905.2. The case for the plaintiff was that maintenance grants being for the support of the individual to whom they were made terminated on the...


  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial