Kolkata Court June 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.
In Re: Burn and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-08-1910
Reported in: (1910)ILR37Cal634
Lawrence H. Jenkins, C.J.1. This is a case which has been referred to this Court under Section 57 of the Indian Stamp Act, and though the case submits, for our consideration, several documents termed pay orders, it has been agreed by the contending parties that we should express our opinion as to the liability to stamp-duty of one only of these documents, and that this opinion should be treated as governing the rest.2. The document selected for this purpose is in these terms: 'BURN & CO., LD., HOWRAH, Pay Order 8684 In favour of Mr. J.C. Hinde. Account-Export Cash. Passed for under rupees seventy-one only. ___________________________________________________________________________________ PARTICULARS. | Rs. | A. | P. | SIGNATURE OF | | | | PAYEE. _______________________________________|______|_____|_____|______________________ To amount of freight for export | | | | charges on Orders Nos. 11085, | | | | 11138, 3783, 3577, 2632 ... | 70 | 0 | 0 | | | | | | | | | | | | | Pay. | | | |...
Kumar Basanta Kumar Roy and ors. Vs. Secretary of State for India in C ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-08-1910
Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.792
1. This is an application for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council from a decree of the High Court. As the decree appealed from did not affirm the decision of the Court immediately below, all that has to be shown is that the amount or value of the subject-matter of the suit in the Court of first instance was Rs. 10,000 or upwards, and that the amount or value of the subject-matter in dispute on appeal to His Majesty in Council is of the same sum or upwards. In support of their contention to this effect, the petitioners have filed in support of their petition an affidavit in which it is said 'that at the time of the suit the land was valued at Rs. 15 per bigha and mesne profits were claimed at the rate of Re. 1 per bigha per year; that according to the said calculation the value of the claim amounted to Rs. 10,764 at the time of the decision of the appeal by the High Court as will appear from the statement given below; that in these circumstances the claim involved in the decree of...
In Re: Burn and Co. and Reference Under Section 57(1) of the Indian St ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-08-1910
Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.778
1. This is a case which has been referred to this Court under Section 57 of the Indian Stamp Act, and though the case submits for our consideration several documents, termed pay orders, it has been agreed by the contending parties that we should express our opinion as to the liability to stamp duty of one only of these documents, and that this opinion should be treated as governing the rest.2. The document selected for this purpose is in these terms:Pay Order No. 8684Burn & Co. Ld., HowrahIn Favour of J.C. HindeAccount Export Cash-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Particulars Signature ofPayee.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------To amount of freight Payfor export charges (Initials illegi-11138, 3783, 3577, able)2632... ... ... 700020-6-1908.Received Rs. 70 (se-venty only)C.JonesRupees seventy onlyJ.C. Hinde20-6-1908.End: J.N.M.Entd. C.B., Folio.20-6-1908.Dated the 20th June1908. ------Pay rupees seve...
Emperor Vs. Abani Bhushan Chuckerbutty
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-06-1910
Reported in: (1910)ILR37Cal845
Holmwood, J.1. The plea has been raised before us that there is no proper finding that the forfeiture of pardon under Section 339 of the Criminal Procedure Code was incurred in this case, and that, therefore, this Court has no jurisdiction to try the case. Whether we look at the section as it stands, or at the law as laid down by the Bombay and Madras Courts under the present Act, or by this Court under the Act of 1898, there seems to be no doubt that the procedure followed in this case has been the correct procedure.2. The defence has principally relied upon Emperor v. Kothia (2), where Beaman J. lays down precisely the procedure which has been adopted in this case as the procedure to be followed. At the termination of the trial in which the pardon is given, the accomplice must be discharged by the Court which tries the case. In this case it was the Special Tribunal. 'Then, if so advised, the Crown may re-arrest and proceed against him for the offence in respect of which he was given ...
Asad Ali Mollah Vs. Haidar Ali
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-06-1910
Reported in: (1911)ILR38Cal13
Mookerjee and Carnduff, JJ.1. The substantial question of law, which calls for decision in this appeal, relates to the right of an assignee of a decree for maintenance to execute it against the judgment-debtor in the same manner as the original decree-holder. The circumstances under which the present dispute has arisen between the parties, have not formed the subject of controversy before us. On the 18th April, 1900, one Banu Bibi commenced an action for partition of moveable and immoveable properties jointly owned and possessed by her along with her co-sharer. On the 18th April, 1901,. a decree was made by consent, the effect of which was that the plaintiff relinquished her claim to the properties in suit, and the defendant undertook to pay her Rs. 5 per month for her maintenance during her lifetime; they also undertook to continue the maintenance to the sons and daughters born of her womb; and the sum payable was made a charge upon certain specified properties. The decree provided la...
Sheikh Asad Ali Molla and anr. Vs. Sheikh Haider Ali and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-06-1910
Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.826
1. The substantial question of law, which calls for decision in this appeal, relates to the right of an assignee of a decree for maintenance to execute it against the judgment-debtor in the same manner as the original decree-holder. The circumstances, under which, the present dispute has arisen between the parties, have not formed the subject of controversy before us. On the 18th April, 1900, one Banu Bibi commenced an action for partition of movable and immovable properties jointly owned and possessed by her along with her co-sharers. On the 18th April 1901, a decree was made by consent, the effect of which was that the plaintiff relinquished her claim to the properties in suit, and the defendant undertook to pay her Rs 5 per month for her maintenance during her life-time; they also undertook to continue the maintenance to the sons and daughters born of her womb; and the Sum payable was made a, charge upon certain specified properties. The decree provided lastly that if the money was ...
Hari Dasi Debi Vs. Dharaj Chandra Bose and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-04-1910
Reported in: 7Ind.Cas.43
1. A preliminary objection was taken as to the competence of the plaintiff to bring this appeal or indeed to sue at all in respect of this estate on the ground that the estate had passed out of her hands by sale under a mortgage decree.2. This sale in execution, however, was held on the 19th June 1907 and the Revenue sale now in dispute was held on the 26th March 1907.3. The decree on the mortgage has, moreover, been impugned in a Regular suit and the matter has been carried to His Majesty in Council. We are asked to postpone the hearing of this appeal until the decision of their Lordships of the Privy Council in the suit to set aside the mortgage decree.4. This we decline to do on the simple ground that there was an interval of nearly three months between the Revenue sale and the mortgage sale and should the plaintiff succeed in this suit she would be entitled to mesne profits out of the estate from the date of the Revenue sale till the date of the mortgage sale and, therefore, has a ...
Emperor Vs. Pramatha Nath Bose
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-03-1910
Reported in: (1910)ILR37Cal878
Harington, J.1. This is an appeal against the order of the Sessions Judge of Burdwan setting aside on appeal the conviction and sentence passed on one Pramatha Nath Boss who was convicted of an offence under Section 193 of the Indian Penal Code by the Deputy Magistrate of Burdwan. The facts are that the defendant verified and filed a written statement in suit No. 462 of 1907. In suit No. 451 of 1907 the defendant gave evidence and was cross-examined with a view of showing that certain statements he had made in the written statement he had verified and filed in suit No. 462 of 1907 were false. He admitted they were false, and on the strength of that admission he was prosecuted and convicted before the Deputy Magistrate.2. The learned Sessions Judge set aside the conviction on the ground that, under the proviso to Section 132 of the Evidence Act, the answers given in cross-examination at the trial of suit No. 451 of 1907 could not be proved against him on a charge of having made false st...
Charles Walter George Cox Vs. Emily Florence Cox
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-03-1910
Reported in: 47Ind.Cas.510
Fletcher, J.1. This is a petition presented to the Court by C.W.G. Cox for the dissolution of his marriage with the respondent B.F. Cox on the ground of adultery to this petition there is no co-respondent. The adultery alleged in the petition is said to be proved by the admission contained in a letter, dated the 31st January, written by the respondent and addressed to the petitioner, in which it is said that she admitted that in a weak moment, she had committed adultery with a man who sympathises with her but whose name she will not give up.' The other case of adultery alleged is in the month of December, when it is said the respondent on three occasions was visited in the petitioner's house by a man whose name the petitioner has been unable to discover. Now the petition was presented to the Court and the Master directed citations to issue to the respondent. In my opinion, he was wholly wrong in doing that. However that may be, the jurisdiction is a special jurisdiction vested in the C...
Keshab Lal Nag Majumdar Vs. Madhu Sudan Pal Kundu and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-03-1910
Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.685
1. In the seven cases out of which these appeals arise the plaintiffs., who are different in each, sued to recover from the defendant No. 1, who is the tenant of them all, possession each of his share of the tenure, held by the defendant under separate leases from each, on the ground that the defendant had broken certain conditions of the leases. The defendant No. 1 is a permanent tenure-holder under the plaintiffs and the condition of the lease, which he is said to have broken, runs as follows: I shall not transfer this jamai land to any body either by gift, sale, ijara, conditional sale, mortgage, or take in any partner, and the land will not be sold for the debt of any one else--also I shall not be able to charge it as security if I stand security for any body--I shall not be able to transfer the same either to any of your co-sharers fraudulently or to anybody else. If I commit breach in respect of any one of the above conditions, then I shall lose all my interest in the jamai land ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »