Kolkata Court April 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.
Janendra Mohun Choudhury and ors. Vs. Gopal Chandra Har
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-18-1917
Reported in: 40Ind.Cas.450
Beachcroft, J.1. The plaintiff is the appellant before us. He applied under Section 105 of the Bengal Tenancy Act for settlement of rent payable by the defendant. The defendant claimed that he was a raiyat holding at fixed rates. The First Court found that the tenant was not a raiyat holding at fixed rates and it assessed rent at the rate of Rs. 2-8-0 on the whole of the tenant's holding, it also gave an enhancement on account of the rise in prices. Both sides appealed to the Special Judge. The plaintiff appealed against the decision as to the rate of rent and the defendant appealed against the decision as to status. The learned Judge held that the presumption of Section 50(2) of the Bengal Tenancy Act should apply in this case, and applying that presumption he held that the defendant was a raiyat at fixed rates. Some old papers appear to have been filed in the case dating back to 1264, 1275 and 1276. The papers of 1275 and 1276 show that the tenant was holding at the same rate at whic...
Ganesh Chandra Sikdar and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-1917
Reported in: 40Ind.Cas.740
1. In this case the petitioners before us have been convicted in respect of the manufacture and sale of a liquid substance spoken of as Mrita Sanjivani Sudha and have been sentenced under Section 46(a) of the Bengal Excise Act V of 1909 each to pay a fine of Rs. 200 or in default to undergo six weeks' rigorous imprisonment.2. The manufacture and sale is admitted and the contention of the petitioners, who are Kavirajes by profession, is that Mrita Sanjivani Sudha is a beneficent drug, prepared in accordance with a formula to be found in an Ayurvedic Pharmacopoeia, and used for medicinal purposes only. The ingredients, it is said, are gur, ginger, betel nut and various barks, and after a certain period of fermentation from this base with certain additions in the shape of spices, crushed fruits, and balela skins the finished product is obtained by a process of distillation. The preparation, there is evidence, is prescribed for women suffering from fever or bowel complaints after childbirt...
Tilak Brittial Vs. Rudeswar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-1917
Reported in: 41Ind.Cas.8
1. We cannot go behind the finding of the learned District Judge of the Assam Valley Districts that at the time of the alleged sale the plaintiff was in occupation of the land as a mortgagee. The facts of the present case cannot be distinguished from those of the case which the learned Judge has cited and followed. We refer to the case of Sibendrapada Banerjee v. Secretary of State 34 C. 207 : 5 C. L. J. 390.2. The learned Pleader for the plaintiff has very properly drawn our attention to the case of Sonai Chutia v. Sonaram Chutia 34 Ind. Cas. 692 : 20 C. W. N. 195. That decision was founded upon facts which, so far as we can see, do not exist in the present case. It is, therefore, distinguishable.3. In the view we take, the appeal must be dismissed with the usual order as to costs....
Mohamad Umar and anr. Vs. Musammat Man Koer
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-1917
Reported in: 40Ind.Cas.783
Sanderson, C.J.1. In this case the suit was brought by the plaintiff asking for several reliefs, mainly for a declaration that she was entitled to a certain house and for possession and for arrears of rent.2. The defendant No. 1 is the tenant of the house; defendant No. 2 is a person who purchased the house on the 22nd of March 1911 from the defendants Nos. 3 and 4, the daughter and grandson of one Har Lal Bhagat.3. The first Court gave the plaintiff a decree for arrears of rent only. That Court would have awarded a decree for possession of the property to the plaintiff but for the fact that the requisite notice had not been served.4. The first Appellate Court reversed that decision on the ground that the plaintiff had obtained whatever right she had to the house in question by way of maintenance, and that she being a Hindu widow and having married again had forfeited that right, and, consequently, it gave a decree in favour of the defendants.5. Mr. Justice Mullick, sitting alone to he...
Raja Pramatha Bhusan Deb Roy Bahadur Vs. Ram Chandra Mandal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-1917
Reported in: 39Ind.Cas.881
Fletcher, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff against a decision of the learned Subordinate Judge of Jessore, dated the 14th December 1914, affirming the decision of the Munsif at Narail. The plaintiff brought the suit to recover possession of certain lands. The case is a little difficult one because it involves a question as to the transferability and liability to sale in execution of the rights of an under-ryot. The defendant No. 5 in the present case was the first purchaser, the original under-ryoti being the defendants Nos. 1 and 3, and the defendant No. 5 purchased at a sale in execution of a money-decree. No consent of the plaintiff landlord was obtained to that sale either before the sale in execution or subsequent thereto. The plaintiff purchased at a subsequent sale in execution of a money-decree or, at any rate it must be taken that the sale was a sale under the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code. To that sale the plaintiff naturally assented when he was selling the p...
In Re: Atul Chandra Guha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-1917
Reported in: 42Ind.Cas.619
1. This is an application of a novel character which invites us to set v aside in. exercise of the powers of superintendence conferred upon this Court by Section 107 of the Government of India Act, 1915, an order under Section 33 of the Bengal Civil Courts Act, 1887. The petitioner was Naib Nazir of the Court of the Munsif of Habiganj, and was dismissed by the District Judge of Sylhet on the ground that he had accepted a bribe. He appealed to the Chief Commissioner of Assam who declined to interfere. He now comes up to this Court and invites us to interfere on the ground that the order of the District Judge was made without any opportunity afforded to him to prove his innocence. We are of opinion that an order under Section 33 of the Bengal Civil Courts Act is not an order which can be set aside by this Court under Section 107 of the Government of India Act, 1915. That section confers on each of the High Courts superintendence over all Courts for the time being subject to its appellate...
Basiruddi Sheikh Vs. Mobarak Munshi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-03-1917
Reported in: 40Ind.Cas.157
Fletcher, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff against the decision of the learned Subordinate Judge of Khulna, modifying the decision of the Munsif of the same place. The suit was brought by the plaintiff to recover possession of certain property of which he had a lease. The first Court decreed the suit. The second Court modified the decree', giving the plaintiff possession of one-half. The plaintiff's case was that one Abdul was the original owner of the property who sold it to Meajan, who leased it out to the plaintiff as owner of the property in 1899. The plaintiff was in exclusive possession of the property until ousted by the defendant. The defendant alleged that Abdul had a brother named Gafur; and Gafur and Abdul granted a lease to the defendant's mother Pati Bewa. The Court held that the existence: of Gafur and his interest in the property was not proved. The first Court held that the alleged lease to the defendant's mother had not been proved. The Court of first instance f...
Kali Das Mullick Vs. the East Indian Railway Co. by their Agent of Cal ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-03-1917
Reported in: 40Ind.Cas.626
1. The Judge finds that there was theft of some ghee by the servants of the Railway Company, but that the case is covered by the risk-note as there was no loss of any complete package.2. It does prima facie seem to be hard that the Railway Company can avoid responsibility in such a case by producing the empty tins. But this has been so held already by this Court, and the word 'package' seems to mean both that which is packed and that in which it is packed, its covering or receptacle.3. Then it is said that if that be so the risk-note in this respect is contrary to public policy. The previous cases, however, decided this point to the contrary and nonetheless so because the risk-note which was discussed in those cases is not now in force, for, the risk-note now in use is not so wide as the risk-note before the 9th March 1907. If the former risk-note was held not to be against public policy, a fortiori, the present risk-note is not. Moreover, in the case of the William Dring v. Shiv Prosa...
Srimati Syam Peary Dassya Widow of Madhusudan Dass and anr. Vs. the Ea ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-03-1917
Reported in: 40Ind.Cas.865
1. These appeals arise out of two suits instituted by the Eastern Mortgage & Agency Company, Limited, op the basis of two separate mortgages executed by one Priomoyee Dasi and Mohini Mohan Das respectively. Appeal No. 495 of 1914 is against the preliminary decree in the suit to enforce the mortgage executed by Priomoyee Dasi and Appeal No. 268 of 1915 is against the final decree in that suit, while Appeal No. 544 of 1914 is against the preliminary decree in the suit to enforce the mortgage executed by Mohini Mohan Das and Appeal No. 275 of 1915 is against the final decree in that suit.2. The mortgaged properties originally belonged to one Modusudan Das, who died in April 1865 leaving his widow Sham Peary Dasi the defendant No. 1 in the suits and five sons Mohini Mohan, Radhika Mohan, Lal Mohan, Khetra Mohan and Shosi Mohan, Shosi Mohan died unmarried and intestate on the 1st October 1865 and his one-fifth share thereupon devolved upon his mother Sham Peary. By an ekrar, dated the 29th ...
Amrita Lall Roy and anr. Vs. the Secretary of State for India in Counc ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-03-1917
Reported in: 41Ind.Cas.458
N.R. Chatterjea, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit to set aside the sale of a revenue paying estate under Act XI of 1859. The estate was sold for arrears of revenue for the 'January kist' of 1908 on the 25th June 1908, and was purchased by the Government fur Rs. 50.2. The plaintiff No. 1, who was the owner of the largest share in the estate, and the plaintiff No. 2 who was the patnidar preferred appeals to the Commissioner, but the appeals were dismissed for default. Thereupon the present suit was instituted for reversal of the sale. The plaintiffs alleged that the estate was worth Rs. 6,000, and it has been found that it is worth Rs. 3,000.3. The Courts below dismissed the suits and the plaintiffs have appealed to this Court.4. The first contention raised on behalf of the appellants is that the sale was without jurisdiction, as there was no arrear of revenue within the meaning of Section 2 of Act XI of 1859, for which the estate could be sold. Section 2 lays down what an arrear of...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »