Kolkata Court August 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.
Hari Charan Gorait Vs. Girish Chandra Sadhukhan
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-09-1910
Reported in: (1911)ILR38Cal68
D. Chatterjee and Teunon, JJ.1. In this case a rule issued calling upon the Chief Presidency Magistrate to show cause why certain proceedings should not he quashed on the ground that the materials before him did not disclose any offence within Section 477 of the Indian Penal Code; that the sending of the case to the Honorary Magistrate was without jurisdiction, and that under the circumstances the order for seizure of the books ought not to have been made.2. The facts are that, on the 3rd of February, one Girish Chandra Sadhukhan acting professedly on behalf of his minor son, Nagendra Nath Sadhukhan, and two infant daughters, made to the Chief Presidency Magistrate a complaint to the effect that in Eaisak 1314, corresponding with April 1907, his wife Panna Moyee Dassee had entered into partnership with the three accused, that on her death her interest had devolved upon her children, and that on the death of her father, one Hari Dass Sadhukhan, in Aghran, that is November-December 1909,...
Mukti Nath Thakur Vs. Hon'ble Maharaja Rameshur Singh Bahadur
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-09-1910
Reported in: 7Ind.Cas.340
Woodroffe, J.1. We are not called upon in this appeal to decide this question as if it was res integra. There are decisions which support this appeal, and the only question is whether the learned District Judge was right in holding that the decision reported in Jogendra Nath Roy v. Krishna Promoda Dossi 12 C.W.N. 1032 : 35 C. 1013 : 8 C.L.J. 322, is a bar to the suit.2. It has been contended on behalf of the respondent that the plaintiff could have sued in the Revenue Court, under Section 106 of the Bengal Tenancy Act, and claimed the same relief which he has claimed in this suit, and that, therefore, this suit is barred. But even assuming, for the sake of argument, that the Revenue Court could have granted the same relief, the question, then, is, whether the failure of a person to institute a suit, under Section 106 of the Bengal Tenancy Act, would or would not bar him from bringing a suit such as this to establish his rights. The decision, reported in Golab Misser v. Kumar Kalanand S...
Damodar Misra Vs. Iswar Chandra Chowdhury and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-09-1910
Reported in: 7Ind.Cas.387
Woodroffe, J.1. The suit in this case was decreed by the Munsif, who found that both the decree and the sale thereunder were fraudulent and illegal.2. The lower appellate Court found that the fraud alleged had not been made out, but affirmed the judgment of the Court below, so far as it held that the sale was illegal.3. Against that decision there is an appeal to us; but I think that it is quite clear that the judgment under appeal is correct.4. In the first place, it is objected that no suit lies at all and that the remedy of the plaintiffs was either to have resisted execution under Section 244 of the Code of Civil Procedure, or, if they had failed in that or had not. taken that course, to apply to set aside the sale, on the ground of irregularity under Section 311. The authorities, however, to which we have been referred clearly establish that Section 244 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the sections which deal with proceedings after-sale have no application to cases arising under...
Rajlakshmi Dasee Vs. Katyayani Dasee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-08-1910
Reported in: (1911)ILR38Cal639
Mookerjee and Carnduff, JJ.1. This is an appeal on behalf of the plaintiff in a suit for declaration that a consent-decree to which she was not a party, is in no way binding upon her in respect of the estate dealt with by that decree. The subject-matter of the litigation out of which this appeal has arisen, belonged at one time to Rajballav Seal, a wealthy I Hindu of the Subarnabanik caste, who died on the 1st June, 1870. Two days before his death, Rajballav made a testamentary disposition of his properties, moveable and immoveble, which were of considerable value and were situated principally in the suburbs of this city. He left him surviving his widow, Mati Dasee, and three grandsons by a daughter born of another wife, both of whom had predeceased him. The relationship between the principal parties to the present litigation 0may be illustrated by the annexed genealogical table: (I) Rajballav Seal, died 10th June, 1870. | ---------------------------------------- | | Second wife, Third...
Harendra Nath Mukherjee Vs. Abinash Chandra Banerjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-08-1910
Reported in: 7Ind.Cas.761
1. The question of law which arises for consideration in this Rule relates to the true construction of Section 17 read with Sections 15 and 16 of the Bengal Tenancy Act and their applicability to cases in which an estate has been placed in charge of a Receiver appointed by a Court of competent jurisdiction. One Debendra Nath Mukerjee died intestate on the 16th July 1907. Shortly after his death, on the 9th December 1907, a, suit was commenced by his eldest son for partition of the family properties. On the 4th December 1908, the plaintiff in that suit was appointed Receiver of the subject-matter of litigation. He then brought a suit against the defendants in the case now before us for recovery of arrears of rent due from them in respect of the years 1312 to 1315. The defendants resisted the claim on various grounds amongst which it is necessary to mention only one for our present purposes. They contended that as the Receiver had not registered his name under Section 17 of the Bengal Te...
Gajendra Nath Nandi Vs. Ganendra Kumar Nandi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-07-1910
Reported in: 7Ind.Cas.804
1. We think that this appeal must be allowed. Apart from the prayer for the removal of the administrator, the suit, in the form in which it was brought, appears to have been in the nature of an administration suit against the administrator for the purpose of compelling him to account for the assets of the estate of the deceased and to carry out the duties of his office. The suit was instituted in the Court of a Munsif who by his decree gave certain reliefs to the plaintiff. In the Court of appeal below, the learned Subordinate Judge accepted the contention of the defendant No. 1 that the claim was primarily and essentially for the revocation or annulment of letters of administration with the Will annexed granted by the District, Judge'', and he accordingly held that the ordinary Civil Courts had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit. He also held that the suit was multifarious because it united a claim for the removal of the administrator, cognizable only by the District Judge, with a ...
indu Bhushan Acharya and ors. Vs. Sailaja Sundari Barmanya
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-06-1910
Reported in: 7Ind.Cas.382
Richardson, J.1. The question for consideration on this appeal is whether the decree of the learned District Judge, so far as it set aside the first Court's preliminary decree for partition and the final decree confirming the partition effected by a Commissioner, and so far as it remands the suit for the purpose of giving the plaintiffs an opportunity to bring the heirs of Madhu Sundari on the record as parties, can be supported.2. As to the facts, Sailaja Sundari, the defendant in the suit and respondent before us, and the deceased Madhu Sundari were co-proprietors in equal shares of the four jamas to which the suit relates. The plaintiffs, (the appellants before us) sue as tenants under the heirs of Madhu Sundari of the half share which belonged to her.3. The history of the plaintiff's title as tenants is as follows. It appears that one Kali Nath Dutta, who was at one time the joint Manager of the two ladies, purchased the four jamas in his own name at a sale held in execution of a m...
Basaratali Vs. Sheikh Mahomed Roshan and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-05-1910
Reported in: 7Ind.Cas.421
Woodroffe, J.1. It has been contended on behalf of the plaintiff-appellant, that on the findings as they now stand in the judgment of the lower appellate Court, he should have succeeded and that the lower appellate Court should have held that the defendants Nos. 1 and 2 did not derive any title by virtue of the kobala of the 29th Falgon 1312, M.S., and that the title of the defendant No. 3 remained unaffected. It has also been contended that, apart from this, the judgment of the District Judge being a judgment of reversal of the decision of the first Court, is not one which is sufficient in law; and I think that this objection has been fully made out. In reversing a decision of the first Court the lower appellate Court should state the facts and also the points which are raised before it; and then its decision on such point and the reasons for that decision. We should not be left to spell out the meaning of the lower appellate Court by gathering together portions of findings both from ...
Sarat Chandra Nandan Vs. Girindra Chandra Guin
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-05-1910
Reported in: 7Ind.Cas.702
1. We are invited in this appeal to set aside an order by which the Court below has summarily rejecte and application by the appellant for the appointment of himself as guardian of the person and the property of his wife, Srimati Bibhabati Dasi.2 On the 24th March 1909, the appellant presented an application under Section 10 of Act VIII of 1890. In this application, he stated that his wife was born on the 19th July 1893, that she generally lived with the petitioner in his house, that she was at the time living with her father in the ancestral house of the latter, that her movable properties consisting mainly of ornaments and wearing apparels were with her father, that some of her other movables were with the petitioner, that no guardian of the person and properties of the minor had been appointed by any person or by any Court, and that no application had been made in that behalf. The petitioner further stated that he was a Bachelor of Arts of the Calcutta University and a Law student, ...
Amulya Ratan Sadhukhan and ors. Vs. Preo Nath Dutt
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-05-1910
Reported in: 7Ind.Cas.886
1. This is an appeal on behalf of the judgment-debtor against an order made in the course of proceedings in execution of a decree for money. The District Judge, in reversal of the decision of the Court of first instance, has held that the respondent is entitled to proceed with the execution of his decree.2. The facts, so far as it is necessary to state them for the disposal of the question of law raised before us, lie in a narrow compass. One Uma Charan Sadhnkhan, the predecessor-in-interest of the appellant, held a mortgage-decree against the respondent Priya Nath Dutt. Proceedings were taken in execution of this mortgage-decree and the mortgaged properties were sold. Attempts were then made by the mortgagor to have the execution sale set aside. In the course of these proceedings, the objections of the mortgagor were overruled and an order was made in favour of Uma Charan for cists to the extent of about Rs. 59. This order war, made on the 3rd December 1896. It was subsequently discov...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »