Kolkata Court March 1917 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: Prem Lal Dhar, Ex Part the Official Assignee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-1917
Reported in: 43Ind.Cas.348
Greaves, J.1. This is an application in insolvency to set aside an execution sale of an undivided one fourth share of the premises No. 58-1, Wellington Street, made in Suit No. 694 of 1916, or in the alternative for an order directing the Sheriff to pay the sale-proceeds to the Official Assignee. The application in terms is to set aside the sale of the premises and no share is specified, but this is clearly wrong. On the 24th July 1916 Messrs. Blackwood, Blackwood & Co. obtained a decree for Rs. 5,541-8-6 in Suit No. 690 of 1916 against Sreemati Sukumari Dasee, the widow and administratrix of Prem Lal Dhar, deceased.2. Messrs. Blackwood, Blackwood & Co. on the 31st August 1916, in execution of this decree attached, inter alia, an undivided one-fourth share of No. 58-1, Wellington Street, which formed part of the estate of Prem Lal Dhar, deceased. By an order of this Court, dated the 8th December 1916, and made in Suit No. 694 of 1916, the Sheriff was directed to sell, inter alia. these...
Kusum Kumari Debi and ors. Vs. Surendra Krishna Ghose and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-1917
Reported in: 42Ind.Cas.455
Fletcher, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant against an order of the learned Subordinate Judge Of Nadia, dated the 23rd June 1915, reversing an order of the Munsif of Krishnanagar. The original plaintiff, who bore the following description 'K. P. Ghose, Property Improvement Association, Limited, His Liquidators' whether the word 'His' represents K. P. Ghose or Association, I do not know Surendra Krishna Ghose, Rajendra Krishna Ghose, sons of Kali Prasunna Ghose, by caste Kayestha, by occupation zemindars' brought the suit to recover rent. The learned Munsif held that K.P. Ghose, Property Improvement Association, Limited, His Liquidators' were not entitled to recover the rent sued for and therefore, dismissed the suit although he also expressed the opinion that the defendant had paid the rent that was due in respect of the holding. The plaintiffs then appealed to the Court of the learned Subordinate Judge and the learned Subordinate Judge came to the conclusion that if 'K. P. Ghose...
Padu Mohammad and ors. Vs. Chutra Nath Chaudhury and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-22-1917
Reported in: 41Ind.Cas.203
1. We are invited in this Rule to set aside a decree of dismissal made by a Court of Small Causes. The suit was in essence for rescission of a contract, and in the alternative, for declaration that the contract was either void or voidable and for consequential reliefs. Objection was taken by the defendants that the suit was excluded from the cognizance of a Court of Small Causes under Clauses 16 and 19 of the Second Schedule to the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act. The defendants also objected to the claim on the merits. The Small Cause Court Judge found that the suit was not cognizable in his Court under Clauses 16 and 19 : but, notwithstanding this conclusion, he proceeded to try the case on the merits and ultimately dismissed it. The plaintiffs now contend that the only course open to the Judge was to direct that the plaint be returned to the plaintiffs for presentation to the proper Court. This view has been controverted by the defendants. In our opinion the order made by the Smal...
Ram Prosad Pramanik and anr. Vs. Sricharan Mandal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-22-1917
Reported in: 41Ind.Cas.276
1. This Rule is directed against a decree of a Court of Small Causes in a suit for compensation for a tree wrongfully cut and for crops misappropriated by the defendant. The case for the plaintiff was that the land in dispute was his property and was in his possession, that the tree had been grown and crops of mustard raised by him and that the defendant had unlawfully cut and removed the tree and the crops.2. It is plain that a suit of this description is excepted from the cognizance of a Court of Small Cannes by Article 35, Sub-Clause (ii), of the Second Schedule to the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, which has been inserted therein by the Provincial Small Cause Courts Amendment Act (1914). This provision excludes from the jurisdiction of Courts of Small Causes suits for compensation for acts which are, or save for the provisions of Chapter IV of the Indian Penal Code would be, offences punishable under Chapter XVII of the said Code. It is clear that if the acts attributed to the ...
Ramji Ram Vs. Tipan Prasad Singh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-20-1917
Reported in: 41Ind.Cas.91
1. This is an appeal, under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against a judgment of Mr. Justice Newbould in a suit for arrears of rent. The plaintiff sued to recover rent from the defendant for the last three quarters of 1315, 1316 and the first three quarters of 1317. He subsequently withdrew his claim in respect of the first three-quarters of 1317 with liberty to bring a fresh suit on the same cause of action. The District Judge overruled the contention of the defendant that the rent had been suspended by reason of eviction and decreed the claim for the last three quarters of 1315 and the whole of 1316. This judgment of the District Judge has been affirmed by Mr. Justice Newbould, The facts found may be briefly narrated. The defendant was a tenant under the plaintiff in respect of 57 bighas of land. The plaintiff dispossessed the defendant from 271 bighas. In 1904 the defendant instituted a suit for recovery of possession on declaration that the disputed lands were included in his ten...
Golapdi Meah and ors. Vs. Purna Chandra Dutta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-19-1917
Reported in: 41Ind.Cas.37
Richardson, J.1. I have read the judgment prepared by my brother Walmsley and concur in it. On the question of the extents of the karta's authority which is raised, I had little doubt during the argument, that the karta of a joint Hindu family has authority to consent on behalf of the joint family to the transfer of an occupancy holding, held they the tenants under the joint family as landlords and not transferable without their consent duly given by themselves or oh their behalf.Walmsley, J.2. This is an appeal by defendants Nos. 2 to 7 against a judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge of Fridpur, who reversed the decision of the first Court and decreed the plaintiffs' suit. The circumstances are as follows. The Dutt family, to which the plaintiffs belong, hold a certain tenure, and within that tenure the land in suit was let out to two tenants named Dinu and Menajuddin in 1878. Their interest was that of occupancy raiyats, without the right of transfer, except with the consent of t...
Goljan Bibi Vs. Sheikh Nafar Ali and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-19-1917
Reported in: 40Ind.Cas.234
Richardson, J.1. This is a Rule calling on the opposite party to show cause why the order of the Officiating District Judge of Dacca, dated 2nd November 1916, should not be set aside.2. The order was made in the following circumstances. The petitioner filed an appeal in the District Judge's Court on the 31st May 1916. On the 4th July 1916 she was directed under Rule 10, Order XLI, to furnish security in the sum of Rs. 80 for the costs of the appeal and of the original suit. The time for furnishing security was more than once extended. On the 26th August 1916 the Officiating District Judge refused to extend the time further and dismissed the appeal under Clause (2) of Order XLI, Rule 10. On the 2nd November 1916, the petitioner applied for the re-admission of the appeal. By the first of the two orders made on that date, the Officiating District Judge directed that the appeal should be re-admitted if the amount of the security ordered were deposited in Court by the 8th November 1916. By ...
Atikulla Munshi Vs. AzimuddIn Haji
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-19-1917
Reported in: 40Ind.Cas.415
Sanderson, C.J.1. This appeal from the judgment of my learned brother Mr. Justice Newbould raises a point which is somewhat out of the ordinary.2. I do not suppose that the decision that I am about to give will be a precedent in other cases, because I imagine that the particular form of the contract in the present case is not a usual one. The borrower of Rs. 550 entered into an agreement dated the 10th of Kartick 1315, reciting that he borrowed on that day Rs. 550 'for the purpose of purchasing hide within the month of Magh of the current year which is the period fixed for repayment.' Then instead of undertaking to repay the money, the method of repayment was as follows:I shall pay off by 550 maunds of dried autumnal paddy by weighing them on the same day, at the rate of one maund per rupee, and T shall have it entered on the back of this deed;' so that, the method of repayment; was by delivery of certain paddy which is to be 550 maunds at the rate of one maund per rupee. Then the borr...
Piran Bibi and ors. Vs. Jitendra Mohan Mookerjee and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-19-1917
Reported in: 40Ind.Cas.845
Fletcher, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendants against a judgment of the learned District Judge of Murshidabad dated the 18th May 1914, reversing the decision of the Munsif at Barhampore. The appeal is preferred in the main against a decree absolute made in a suit to enforce a mort gage security by way of sale. The defend ants are now in the shoes of the mortgagors who were their predecessors-in-title .The plaintiffs are the sons of the original mortgagee. The suit was brought by the plaintiffs to enforce the mortgage and on the 10th August 1908 a preliminary decree for Rs. 130 was made by the First Court An application was then made on the 8th April 1911 for a decree absolute and the decree was made absolute ex parte on the 6th May 1911 Subsequently that ex parte decree was set aside and the case was brought on for re-hearing. The case set up by the defendants who are now the mortgagors was that more than three years ago they had paid the whole of the amount awarded by the prelimi...
Badal Molla Vs. Chemai Mondal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-19-1917
Reported in: 40Ind.Cas.894
Fletcher, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff from a decision of the learned Additional District Judge of the 24-Pergunnahs, dated the 19th January 1915, affirming the decision of the Munsif of the first Court at Alipur. The plaintiff brought the suit for redemption. It is admitted that the plaintiff's predecessor was the mortgagor and the defendant No. 1 was the mortgagee. The equity of redemption has not been foreclosed or put an end to either by the acts of the parties subsequent to the mortgage or by an order of the Court. One would have expected, therefore, that a case for redemption had clearly arisen, because one of the elementary rules of equity is that once a mortgage always a mortgage. The Courts of Equity have always held that a mortgagee should not be allowed to obtain any undue advantage by his mortgage except the amount of the principal, interest and costs due on his mortgage. It is not necessary to go into the cases on this point. In the present case, however, the le...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »