Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 49Ind.Cas.454
Greaves, J.1. On the 22nd February last I granted a Rule at the instance of Mr. Surendra Chandra Ghosn calling on the Chairman of the Corporation of Calcutta to show cause why certain names should not be expunged from the Municipal Election Roll. The Rule was served in the first ' instance on the Chairman alone and was returnable on Monday last. When the Rule came on for hearing, on that day two preliminary objections were taken by Counsel on behalf of the Chairman of the Corporation. First, it was said that the decision of the Chairman was final and that the Court had no jurisdiction to deal with the matter; secondly, it was said that the applicant did not bring himself within the provisions of Section 45 of the Specific Relief Act, under which alone the Court had jurisdiction. So far as the first objection is concerned, it seems to me that unless the Municipal Act specifically lays down that the decision of the Chairman is final, the jurisdiction of the Court under Section 45 of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 44Ind.Cas.922
Richardson, J.1. The appellants before us are the plaintiffs in a suit for possession. They claim the right to possess the land to which the suit relates as under-raiyats. The defendants include some of the co-sharer-landlords of the original raiyati holding. They have purchased the holding in execution of a decree for money obtained by them against the original raiyat. It is alleged that after their purchase they sub-let the land to the original raiyats, that is, to the persons under whom or under whose predecessor the plaintiffs originally came in as under-raiyats. These persons have also been made defendants. The Court of Appeal below has dismissed the suit on the ground that under Section 85 (1) of the Bengal Tenancy Act the plaintiffs have no valid title to possession as against the landlord defendants.2. The conclusion seems to me to be based on a misapplication to the facts found of the law contained in the Bengal Tenancy Act as explained and illustrated by decided cases. The pr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1919)ILR46Cal13
Richardson and Walmsley, JJ.1. This is an appeal from the judgment and decree of the District Judge of Chittagong dated the 29th May 1915. The appellant is the plaintiff and the suit has a somewhat chequered history. It was brought to recover possession of certain lands which the plaintiff claims as part of the waqf properties appertaining to a mosque in the district of Chittagong of which he is the mutwalli. The trial Court made a decree in favour of the plaintiff. That decree was upheld by the lower appellate Court; but on remand by this Court the suit has been dismissed. All the material issues which arise in this case have been decided in the plaintiff's favour except the issue whether he is the de jure mutwalli of the mosque. On this question the learned District Judge has come to a conclusion adverse to the plaintiff. That conclusion, however, is based on a misapplication of Mahomedan Law to the facts of this case. The endowment is one of very old standing. It was apparently in e...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1919)ILR46Cal22
Teunon and Newbould, JJ.1. This Rule is directed against an order by which the Court of Small Causes of Dacca has refused an application for execution of a certain decree on the ground that the decree is time-barred. The decree is dated the 9th May, 1913: The decree-holder, who is the petitioner before us, alleges that the judgment-debtor made a payment to him of Rs. 25 on the 10th June, 1914, and a farther payment of Rs. 50 on the 20th November, 1914. He also alleges two earlier payments, which for the purposes of this Rule we may disregard. On the 6th June, 1917, he then made an application to the Court for certifying the above payments. On the 9th June, 1917, he next applied for execution of his decree. Without taking evidence in the matter, the learned Subordinate Judge held that the payments of the 10th June, 1914, and 20th November, 1914, to which we have referred, taken with the decree-holder's application of the 6th June, 1917, were not sufficient to save limitation. We are una...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1919Cal197,51Ind.Cas.76
1. This is an application by Haribhusan Datta for an order that the fact of the death of his father Hem Bhusan Datta be recorded, that the cause title of the suit should be amended by substituting his name in place of that of his deceased father, and that other consequential amendments should be made in the petition whereby these proceedings were originated, and that thereupon the suit should be proceeded with and Letters of Administration with copy of the Will annexed of Sreemutty Nrityamoni Dassee should be granted to the applicant.2. Sreemutty Nrittyamoni Dassee died on the 19th May 1914. Hem Bhusan Datta on the 23rd June 1914 petitioned this Court for a grant of administration with a copy of the Will annexed to the estate of Nrityamoni dated the 19th May 1914. I have not before me a copy of the Will or of the petition, but I understand that no executors were named in the Will and that Hem Bhusan Datta was the residuary legatee. A caveat or caveats were entered by the defendants and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 49Ind.Cas.799
1. This Rule relate to an application made by the petitioner to the District Judge to be appointed Mutwalli of an alleged Wakf property and to the order of the District Judge made thereon dated the 6th August 1917, refusing to deal with the matter on application, on the ground that the petitioner's only course was to proceed by suit under Section 92 of the Civil Procedure Code.2. It has been contended on the petitioner's behalf that the District Judge had jurisdiction to deal with the matter on application, because he is vested with the powers of a Kazi under the Muhammadan Law We were referred to the practice of this Court on the original side, but the case of In re Halima Khatun (1) shows that the practice is far from being settled3. We were also referred to the case of Atimanuessa Bibi v. Abdul Sobhan (2) and the observation of the Privy Council in Mahomed Ismail v. Ahmed Moolla (3).4. It may well be conceded that the District Judge has the powers of a Kazi but it does not necessari...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 49Ind.Cas.988
Lancelot Sanderson, C.J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment; of my learned brother Mr. Justice Greaves. The plaintiff and the defendants entered into three contracts (the dates of which I need not mention), which purported to be in respect of the purchase of a considerable number of yards of Hessian cloth. These contracts, were followed by what have been called settlement contracts, one dated the 14th of May 1917 and another dated the 23rd of May 1917, and a dispute arose between the parties whereby the defendants were claiming from the plaintiff the sum of Rs. 41,655, and in respect of that they claimed to go to arbitration under the arbitration clause which is contained in the contracts. They communicated with the Chamber, we are informed, on the 6th of September, bat it was not until the 1st of December that the Registrar of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce gave notice to the plaintiff of the defendants' claim to go to arbitration and this suit was brought on the 19th of December 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1919Cal1052,45Ind.Cas.200
1. On 18th June 1907, the plaintiff instituted two suits for possession of land on declaration of their title thereto, mesne profits, and other relief.2. For reasons which need not now be considered the suits did not come on for hearing for over two years.3. On 9th November 1911, the suits were on the defendants' application adjourned to 28 tit November. As the plaintiff appears to have had some witnesses present in Court the defendants were ordered to pay the costs of that adjournment.4. It appears clear that the oral testimony of those witnesses for the plaintiff was not considered sufficient to establish his case as we find that on 20th November 1911 on the application of the plaintiff a robokari was sent to the Collector of Dacca to send certain record's. On the same day the defendants made a similar application and a robokarL was also sent at their request. On 28th November 1911 the records had not arrived; and it appears that the plaintiff was notable to make out his case without...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1919Cal898,47Ind.Cas.97
1. The plaintiffs-appellants, who may be referred to as the Tagore Estate, claim to have purchased at sales in execution of decrees for rent, under the Bangal Tenancy Act, a Jamma and a Patni Taluq, and to have taken all necessary steps to set aside encumbrances and to have obtained kabuliyats from the cultivating ryots, and on these grounds to be entitled to rent from those ryots.2. These claims are opposed by what may be referred to as Gobinda Bibu's Estate, and the contentions set up against them are, so far as we are now concerned, (1) that the sale of the Jamma was not a sale for arrears of rent, so as to affect incumbrances, (2) that necessary steps were not taken to set aside incumbrances within the Pattai Taluq, and (3) that for various reasons the kabuliyats are not binding. As to (1).--The decree in execution of which the sale was held was a decree in a suit brought for rent for the Jamma as a tenure covering twelve annas of the Mouza. Originally there was such a tenure, but ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 45Ind.Cas.581
1. This is an appeal from the judgment and decree of the District Judge of Chittagong, dated the 29th May 1915. The appellant is the plaintiff and the suit has a somewhat chequered history. It was brought to recover possession of certain lands which the plaintiff claims as part of the Wakf properties appertaining to a mosque in the district of Chittagong of which he is rhe Mutwalli. The trial Court made a decree in favour of the plaintiff. That decree was upheld by the lower Appellate Court; but on remand by this Court the suit has been dismissed. All the material issues which arise in this case have been decided in the plaintiff's favour except the issue whether he is the de jure Mntwalli of the mosque. On this question the learned District Judge has come to a conclusion adverse to the plaintiff. That conclusion, however, is based on a misapplication of Muhammadan Law to the facts of this case. The endow-ment is one of very old standing. It was apparently in existence when the Distric...
Tag this Judgment!