Kolkata Court November 1912 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.
Makhan Das Kali Vs. Ram Chandra Gosswai and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-25-1912
Reported in: 18Ind.Cas.372
1. The question which arises is this appeal is whether a se-patnidar who has not been ejected is a proceeding under Section 167 of the Bengal Tenancy Act, is entitled to continue collecting rent from the tenants notwithstanding that the dar-patni under which he holds has been extinguished under that section.2. A good deal of argument has been addressed to us as to the effect of a previous litigation and the dismissal of the purchaser's suit against the se-patnidar in a case in which he obtained a decree for possession against the dar-patnidar. It is stated that the learned Counsel for the purchaser withdraw the suit as against the se-patnidar and this appears from the judgment of the High Court. It is clear that the suit Could not have been dismissed for misjoinder of parties, and it is also clear, in our opinion, that the se-patnidars were not necessary parties, inasmuch as the extinction of the dar-patni necessarily carries with it the extinction of the se-patni which is certainly no...
Shananda Chandra Pal and ors. Vs. Sri Nath Roy Chowdhury and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-25-1912
Reported in: 17Ind.Cas.432
1. Two points arise or have been taken in this second appeal, the first point arises out of the contention that the attaching creditor in a money suit, the attachment taking place on the 13th May 1895, was a necessary party to the mortgage suit which was instituted on the 16th July 1896. That he had the right to redeem as long as he was the attaching creditor is clear from Section 91 of the Transfer of Property Act, and that he would be a necessary party under the new Code of Civil Procedure is clear from Order XXXIV, Rule 1. But that is not sufficient to decide the case.2. The learned Vakil for the appellants has urged, on the authority of the judgment of Mr. Justice Banerjee in the case of Ghulam Husain v. Dina Nath 23 A. 467 at p. 470 that the benefit of the charge acquired by the attachment enures in favour of the person who purchased the property at a Court sale under a money-decree. Mr. Justice Banerjee says that in a case of ordinary mortgage, this is beyond doubt and in his Cou...
Birjraj Marwari Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-12-1912
Reported in: 18Ind.Cas.680
1. Having heard and carefully considered the arguments addressed to us by learned Counsel on either side and the evidence on the record, we are of opinion that the facts proved are not sufficient to support the conviction of the petitioner for an offence to cheat.2. Octroi is charged upon certain goods brought into the Sambulpur Municipality. When dutiable goods are exported, a refund of the duty is allowed. The goods have to be presented in bulk at the Octroi out-post with an application for a pass in a prescribed form. In the ordinary course, the application is handed by the applicant or his agent to the out-post mohurir who makes it over to the daroga. It is the duty of the latter to check the applications and having done so to certify the description and quantity of the goods actually presented. The check has to be attested by a member of the Municipal Committee and in this connection the relevant portion of Rule (4) of part B of the supplementary rules for the refund of Octroi dut...
Anath Nath Dey Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-04-1912
Reported in: (1913)ILR40Cal281
Chitty and Richardson, JJ.1. The appellant, Anath Nath Dey, has been convicted by the Fourth Presidency Magistrate of offences under Sections 482, 485 and 486 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 210, or in default to undergo 3 months' simple imprisonment, the fine if realised to be paid to the complainant as compensation. The appellant was also charged in the alternative with offences under Sections 6 and 7 of the Merchandise Marks Act, 1889, but, beyond stating the fact at the commencement of his judgment, the learned Magistrate has taken, no further notice of it. He has not at all discussed those charges or come to any finding upon them. The case of the complainant Ashutosh Pal, as put forward in his petition of complaint, is that he manufactures and carries on business in umbrellas; that his business is of long standing and' his umbrellas known in the markets as 'Butto Kristo Pal' umbrellas, 'Butto Kristo Pal' being the name of his son; that his trademark is...
Nath Nath Dey Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-04-1912
Reported in: 18Ind.Cas.404
1. The appellant, Anath Nath Dey, has been convicted by the fourth Presideney Magistrate of offences under Sections 482, 485 and 486 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 210 or in default to undergo three months' simple imprisonment, the fine, if realised, to be paid to the complainant as compensation. The appellant was also charged in the alternative with offences under Sections 6 and 7 of the Merchandise Marks Act, 1889, but beyond stating the fact at the commencement of his judgment, the learned Magistrate has taken no further notice of it. He has not at all discussed those charges or come to any finding upon them. The case of the complainant, Ashutosh Pal, as put forward in his petition of complaint, is that he manufactures and carries on business in umbrellas; that his business is of long standing and his umbrellas known in the market as 'Butto Kristo Pal' umbrellas, Butto Kristo Pal being the name of his son; that his trade mark is the device annexed to the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›