Kolkata Court June 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.
Nemai Charan De Vs. Secretary of State for India
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-12-1917
Reported in: 46Ind.Cas.741
1. The plaintiff-appellant brought the suit, out of which this appeal arises, for a declaration that the sale held on the 19th Jane 1912 under the Public Demands Recovery Act was null and void and did not affect the plaintiff's title to the lands in suit. The plaintiff also prayed for confirmation of possession and for other reliefs.2. The suit has been valued at Rs. 998 and the property was sold for 3 pies.3. The sale has been attacked on the ground that no notice under Section 10 of Bengal Act I of 1895 was served.4. The learned District Judge says: 'It is true that the peon's report of service of the notice under Section 10, Act I of 1895, does not show that there was no adult male member of the family present on whom he could have served the notice as he was bound to do. The person is unfortunately dead, so that he could not be questioned on this point. Had it been alleged that an adult member of the family was there at the alleged date of service, the witnesses might have been que...
Elias Joseph Solomon and ors. Vs. Jyotsna Ghoshal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-11-1917
Reported in: 44Ind.Cas.157
Greaves, J.1. This is an application to examine on commission the defendant in the suit and the mother of the defendant. So far as the defendant is concerned, it appears on the evidence that he probably cannot get leave to come to Calcutta, and that he is not likely to come to Calcutta for the period of one year. He is at present serving in the Bombay Presidency. The plaintiffs undertake not to bring on this case before February next, and under, those circumstances the defendant at the same time undertakes that in the event of his coming to Calcutta before February next he will apply to be examined in Court de bene esse. Under these circumstances it seems to me that the beat course is that this application should stand over, so far as the defendant is concerned, until the reopening of the Courts after the Xmas vacation, and if before that time the defendant comes to Calcutta he will in accordance with his undertaking apply to be examined de bene esse, but if up to that time he is unabl...
Srimati Anila Debi and anr. Vs. Moni Mohan Mukerjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-08-1917
Reported in: 41Ind.Cas.57
Fletcher, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs against a decision of the learned District Judge of 24-Pergannas, dated the 6th April 1915, reversing a decision of the Subordinate Judge of Alipore. The suit was brought by a Hindu widow to get aside a permanent lease which was alleged to have been granted by her. The document was presented to the Sub-Registrar for registration on the 17th February 1910. The executant having been duly summoned failed to appear. Thereupon the Sub-Registrar held that there was a denial of execution by the executant and declined to register the deed. The authorities in this Court establish clearly that a wilful failure to appear before a Sub-Registrar amounts to a denial of execution within the meaning of Section 72 of the Registration Act. Therefore, no appeal lay upon the decision of the Sub-Registrar to the Registrar. The only procedure open to the party presenting the deed was to apply to the Registrar under Section 73 of the Registration Act to dire...
Hazari Khan and ors. Vs. Nafer Chandra Pal Chowdhury and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-08-1917
Reported in: 40Ind.Cas.718
1. This is a Rule calling upon the District Magistrate of Nadia and the second party to proceedings under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to show cause why the final order that was made under that section should not be set aside on certain grounds. It appears that the members of the second party obtained a money decree against one Nabai Khan and three others, his sons, and that in execution of that decree certain holdings alleged to be the property of Nabai Khan were put up for sale and purchased by the second party. One of the holdings so put up for sale is described as the kunjimari khal and four connected jalkars with a rental of Rs. 3 and it appears that in pursuance of the sale, delivery of possession was taken through the Civil Court on the 22nd June 1915. The case for the first party was that this khal and its connected jalkars did not in fact belong to Nabai Khan personally but were the property of practically the whole body of villagers, Nabai Khan and Sabdul Kha...
Asistulla Vs. Sadatulla and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-08-1917
Reported in: 41Ind.Cas.747
1. This is an appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent from a judgment of Mr. Justice Mullick in a suit for recovery of possession of land on declaration of title. The case for the plaintiffs is that on the 21st March 1897 they, along with defendants Nos. 1 and 8, purchased the disputed property from the proprietor, but that, by the fraud of the first defendant who was entrusted with the preparation and execution of the every once, the (sic)namas of the plaintiffs were omitted from the document The plaintiffs were for a declaration of their title and for recovery of the lands from the defendants who have wrongfully kept them out of possession The Courts below have concurrently found that the allegations of the plaintiffs are well founded and have decreed the claim. The decree has been affirmed by Mr. Justice Mullick. In the present appeal, this decision has been assailed as erroneous in law. It has been argued that the plaintiffs cannot establish their title till the conveyance is ...
Natabar Dutta and ors. Vs. Biseswar Rakhit and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-08-1917
Reported in: 46Ind.Cas.412
1. In this case proceedings under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code, Were taken in respect of certain premises which are spoken of as consisting of, first, a dalan, secondly, a hotel, and thirdly, a privy. Evidence was gone into and at the close of the case the learned Deputy Magistrate made his final order in favour of the second party in respect of the dalan and in favour of the first party in respect of the hotel. He made no order with regard to the privy. His final order is dated the 2nd March 1917. The omission in respect of the privy having been pointed out to him by the second party on the 5th March without giving notice to the first party, he makes this ex parte order:There is evidence that eht privy goes with the dalan, so that this privy remains in the possession of the second party.2. Now it is quite obvious that having in the first instance omitted to make any order with regard to the privy, he should not haveproceeded to supplement his first order by this subsequent ord...
Brojendra Kumar Saha and ors. Vs. Kali Nath Saha and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-07-1917
Reported in: 41Ind.Cas.77
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs against a decision of the learned Additional Subordinate Judge of Nadia, dated the 2nd August 1915, reversing a decision of the Munsif at Kushtia. The plaintiffs brought the suit for a declaration that they were entitled to a half of the shares in the Bengal Paper Mill Company, Limited, and for consequential reliefs. The plaintiffs' case was that the shares had been purchased out of the fund belonging to a firm which was formerly carried on by the plaintiffs and defendants Nos. 1 to 6 but was subsequently dissolved, and that, therefore, the plaintiffs were entitled to a half of the shares.2. The Court of first instance decreed the suit, as it was not disputed that the plaintiffs were entitled to a half of the ten shares in question. The learned Judge in the lower Appellate Court dismissed the whole suit;, holding that the plaintiffs could not get a half of the ten shares unless there had been an adjustment of the accounts of the partnership busine...
Dwarik Bala and ors. Vs. Nidhi Ram Bala and Shusari Dasya and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-07-1917
Reported in: 40Ind.Cas.462
1. This is an appeal by the defendants against a judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge of Jessore affirming a decision of the Munsif of Jhenida. The plaintiff brought a suit in the alternative, first of all to recover certain particular specified land on the footing that a legal partition had been made between the parties and, if the partition was not legal, then he asked to be put in joint possession with the defendants. This is not a case where the plaintiff sued to recover a particular land on the footing that there had been a partition and that ease having failed the Court awarded a decree for joint possession. The plaintiff set out his case from the outset and the defendants had notice of the alternative case. They might have applied to the Court under the provisions of the Code to exclude one of the causes of action from the present trial. They, however, did not do so. The case went to trial and was argued in both the lower Courts without any objection, and now in the second ...
Jatindra Nath Bose and ors. Vs. Mahammad Mallik and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-07-1917
Reported in: 40Ind.Cas.659
1. This is an appeal against a decision of the learned Additional Subordinate Judge of Nadia, dated the 12th July 1915, affirming a decision of the Munsif of Ranaghat. The plaintiffs brought a suit to recover possession from the defendants of 11/2 bighas of land, alleging that they and the pro forma defendants were the landlords and that as in a previous rent suit the defendants had denied the fact that the plaintiffs were the landlords, the plaintiffs were entitled to recover possession. In this case the learned Subordinate Judge has found that the plaintiffs were the landlords. Against that Dr. Dwarka Nath Mitra says that in the former suit in which the plaintiffs sued for rent the defendants raised one and only one issue, namely, whether the relationship of landlord and tenant existed between the plaintiffs and the defendants. It was found in that case that the plaintiffs had failed to prove such relationship. It is said, therefore, that it was not competent to the learned Subordina...
Debendra Nath Das Gupta Vs. Registrar, Joint Stock Companies
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-07-1917
Reported in: 41Ind.Cas.307
1. In this case it appears that the petitioner was one of the Directors of a Joint Stock Company, known as the Darjeeling Press Company, Limited. He has been convicted under Section 134 (4) of the Indian Companies Act, VII of 1913, in respect of a default made in filing with the Registrar the balance-sheet for the year 1911-15.2. It is not disputed that as a matter of fact in respect of the filing of the balance-sheet with the Registrar of Companies a default was made, and the defence of the petitioner as placed before us is that in fact in that year there was no general meeting and that being so, no balance-sheet was laid before the Company at any such general meeting. His contention then is that these preliminaries not having been fulfilled it was impossible for him or his Company to comply with the requirements of Section 134 and that he should have been convicted, if at all, not under Section 134 but under Section 76 or 131. But it is not disputed, and in fact it is admitted, that ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »