Kolkata Court December 1916 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.
Ramani Mohan Roy Vs. Jagubandhu Karmakar And, ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-13-1916
Reported in: 37Ind.Cas.881
1. The plaintiff was away from home for a number of years and during his absence his son defendant No. 5 managed his properties.2. The plaintiff had a nimhowla within a certain osat taluk which was sold for arrears of rent. The purchaser served notices under Section 167 of the Bengal Tenancy Act upon under-tenants and then sold the osat taluk to defendant No. 1. Defendant No. 1 brought a suit for khas possession against defendant No. 5 as the son and heir of the plaintiff described as dead and got a decree in a contested suit.3. The plaintiff on return from pilgrimage brought the suit giving rise to this appeal for a declaration that he was not bound by the decree against defendant No. 5 and for recovery of possession. Both the Courts below decreed the suit of the plaintiff and defendant No. 1 appeals. It has so happened that pending the appeal the plaintiff died leaving defendant No. 5 as his sole heir and the contest is now between defendant No. 1 as the appellant and defendant No. 5...
NaraIn Chandra Dalal Vs. Maharaja Manindra Chandra Nandi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-13-1916
Reported in: 37Ind.Cas.999
1. Two points have been argued in this case first, that the Judge was wrong in holding that the presumption of fixity under Section 50 of the Bengal Tenancy Act has been rebutted by the fact that the rent was increased from Rs. 3-3-0 odd to Rs. 3-4-0 odd and secondly, that he was wrong in holding that the defendant in this case had exceeded his rights under the law in building a suitable house for himself on a holding whatever its nature was.2. With regard to the first point, we do not think it necessary to go into the matter in this case, as it seems to us that the finding of the learned Judge that there has been a variation at the time of the dakhil kharij, seems to be a finding of fact.3. With regard to the second point, we think that the learned Judge is clearly wrong. Upon the learned Judge's own finding the defendant is an occupancy raiyat, and if he is an occupancy raiyat, then under Section 23 of the Bengal Tenancy Act he may use the land in any manner which does not materially...
Jamini Mohan Gupta Vs. Ram Narayan Parey and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-13-1916
Reported in: 38Ind.Cas.542
1. Durga Charan Sen the deceased father of defendants Nos. 1, 2 and 3, mortgaged properties Nos. 1 and 2 to the deceased father of the plaintiff under a kistbandi mortgage bond for Rs. 800, and dated the 11th of Jyesih 1291: then an the 3rd of Bhadra 1300 he mortgaged property No. 2 to one Behari Lall. Then on the 4th of Magh 1306 he mortgaged properties Nos. 1, 2 and 3 to the father of the plaintiff for Rs. 500 made up of Rs. 200 due under the first mortgage of 1291 and Rs. 300 cash, and lastly on the 30th Chaitra 1306 he mortgaged property No. 2 to the father of defendant No. 4, who purchased the same in execution of a decree baeed upon that mortgage. Upon the plaintiff bringing this suit on his mortgage, dated the 4th Magh, 1306, defendant No. 4 alone opposed him on the ground amongst others that the bond was collusive. That plea has been overruled and the only question now before us is the form and nature of the decree that should be made in the case.2. There is no dispute that the...
Chairman of the Commissioner of the Noavadwip Municipality Vs. Gour Ch ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-13-1916
Reported in: 38Ind.Cas.789
1. The main question in this anneal is, whether a holding No. 754 in the Nobadwip Municipality and named the Sribas Anginan is liable to pay the latrine tax. The learned District Judge has held it is not and it is contended that he is wrong. Section 321 of the Bengal Municipal Act provides that when a holding contains a dwelling-house or a privy it is assessable with latrine tax. The learned Judge has found there are no privies in the holding and that finding is final. He has also found that it does not contain a dwelling-house, because the houses in it are not used as permanent places of residence by any one but temporary shelter is afforded therein to pilgrims and guests during festivals. The question for decision is whether houses so used can be called dwelling-houses. The deed of endowment authorises the shehaits to allow pilgrims who do not find shelter anywhere else to stop here during festivals, receiving food from the institution and paying nothing either for food or residence....
K. Simhachalam Vs. Rati Kanta Laha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-12-1916
Reported in: 41Ind.Cas.138
1. The question for our consideration in this Rule is one of jurisdiction. The complainant has brought charges under sections 403, 406 of the Indian Penal Code in the Court of the Magistrate at Krishnagar in the District of Nadia, against the petitioner, an official of an Insurance Company having its Head Office at Bimlipatam in the Madras Presidency, alleging that, he has misappropriated certain sums of money paid on account of an insurance policy. The question is whether the case can be tried in the Nadia Court.2. Chapter XV of the Code of Criminal Procedure deals with the jurisdiction of Criminal Courts. Section 177 provides the general Rule that an offence must ordinarily be tried in the Court, within the local limits of whose jurisdiction it was committed. Then follow a number of enabling sections which extend the jurisdiction of Courts. One of the, Section 181 (2), pro. vides specially for the trial of the offence of criminal misappropriation. By it the offence may be tried by a ...
Bhosai (Bepari) and ors. Vs. Aminuddi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-12-1916
Reported in: 37Ind.Cas.847
1. The plaintiffs appellants as the owners of a 5/6th share of a miras tenure sued to recover rent of a houla (subordinate to the miras) held by the principal defendants, the owner of the remaining 1/6th share of the miras being made a pro forma defendant on the ground that she refused to join with the plaintiffs in the suit. The suit was based upon a kabulipat which described the land let out as 50 bighas by guess' and provided that the lessees should enjoy the land rent-free for two years and that thereafter they should pay rent at the rate of Rs. 2 per bigha fixed in perpetuity for as much land as was cleared and brought under cultivation. No period was fixed within which the land should be reclaimed, but it was provided that if the surrounding lands were all brought under cultivation the executants would be liable to pay rent for the entire area in their possession at the stipulated rate.2. The area of the land comprised in the howla was found to be 83 bighas in the Record of Right...
Priyanath Mitter and anr. Vs. Anath Nath Dev
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-12-1916
Reported in: 37Ind.Cas.942
1. Three points were argued in this appeal; first, that the case was governed by the Bengal Tenancy Act and, therefore, Priyanath had occupancy rights and the plaintiff cannot ignore him and ask for khas possession: secondly, that, on the findings, no abandonment is made out and that even if it can be said that there was an abandonment, the abandonment had been waived by the suit for rent brought by the plaintiff in 1908: and thirdly, that upon the findings, the suit for recovery of possession against Fani is barred by limitation.2. The learned Judge has found that Priyanath abandoned the lands immediately after the lease, that is about 1885.3. It is contended, first, that no abandonment under Section 87 of the Bengal Tenancy Act is made out; and, secondly, that if there was an abandonment, it had been waived.4. The learned Judge has found abandonment without any reference to Section 87 of the Bengal Tenancy Act and we think that he had every right to do so. There is nothing in the Ben...
Upendra Nath Ghose and ors. Vs. Gopi Charan Saha and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-12-1916
Reported in: 44Ind.Cas.595
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for enhancement of rent of a tenure. Defendants proved payment of rent at the same rate for a period of 20 years before the institution of the suit and the learned Subordinate Judge held that a presumption arose under Section 50(2) of the Bengal Tenancy Act that the rent was being paid at that rate from the time of the Permanent Settlement. Plaintiff produced a kabuliyat of the year 1260, corresponding to 1853, and relied upon it as showing that the tenants had agreed to pay enhancement of rent. It appears that there were originally four separated tenures which were amalgamated into one by the kabuliyat of 1853. The main question for Our consideration is whether there was the creation of a new tenancy under the kabuliyat or merely a recognition of the previously existing tenures. The learned Subordinate Judge was of opinion that there was no new tenancy created by the kabuliyat, although the tenant expressly stipulated to pay enhanced rent. He relied...
Haribangsa Shibdas Rakshit Vs. Nalini Mohan Shaha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-11-1916
Reported in: 40Ind.Cas.799
Sanderson, C.J.1. This is an appeal by the defendants from the judgment of Greaves, J., whereby he gave judgment for the plaintiffs for Rs. 4,750 and costs.2. The cases made by the plaintiffs and the defendants in the pleadings are fully set out in the learned Judge's judgment, and I need not refer to them in detail.3. The case made at the trial for the plaintiffs was based upon the evidence of Bhuban Mohan Saha, who stated that he looked after the plaintiffs' business.4. He alleged that the plaintiffs bought from Gillanders Arbuthnot & Co. 251 bags of Java Sugar, and that a delivery order for the same, signed by Gillanders Arbuthnot & Co., was brought to him by the broker of the plaintiff firm, viz., one M.L. Roy. The delivery order was as follows:Dock Delivery Order,Calcutta, 25th April 1913.No. 479ToThe Superintendent,Kidderpore Docks.Indiaoneanna.5. Please deliver to Baboo Lalit M. Nalini M. Shah, 251 bags Java Sugar Arqi: 17 Mark K.P.Ex: S.S. Burma. Kidderpore Docks.(Two hundred) ...
Suresh Chandra Roy Chowdhury and ors. Vs. Surendra Chandra Roy Chowdhu ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-07-1916
Reported in: 37Ind.Cas.870
Fletcher, J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment of the learned District Judge of Rajshahye, dated the 14th March 1914, modifying the decision of the learned Subordinate Judge of the same place. The suit was brought by the plaintiff for a declaration of his right to the use of a cartain private road and for an order compelling the defendants to remove certain obstructions. The road consisted of two parts; namely, first, what is called in these proceedings the main road and secondly, the branch road. The present appeal relates wholly to the road which is called the main road. Originally this property, the road, with the adjoining lands belonged to the plaintiff and the defendants jointly. Subsequently, a partition suit was instituted. Daring the course of those proceedings, the parties arrived at a settlement and it was agreed that certain land should be given to the plaintiff and certain land to the defendants. The main road clearly falls within the limits of the land which was given...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »