Kolkata Court May 1918 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.
Pran Krishna Nath and ors. Vs. Mohesh Chandra Choudhury
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-17-1918
Reported in: AIR1919Cal901,47Ind.Cas.134
1. The only question raised in this appeal is, whether the plaintiff can claim the price of paddy stipulated to be paid at the market rate, or only the price of the paddy as mentioned in the Kabuliyat.2. This tarns upon the construction of the Kabuliyat; and as we construe it, we think the tenant agreed to pay 52 aris of paddy and on default to pay Rs. 15 as the price there of. The price of the paddy, therefore, was fixed by the parties in the document. We are accordingly of opinion that under the terms of the Kabuliyat the plaintiff is not entitled fro get anything more than Rs. 15 as the price of the paddy.3. The decree of the lower Court must accordingly be set aside and that of the first Court restored. We make no order as to costs....
Harihar Das and ors. Vs. Chandra Kumar Guha and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-1918
Reported in: AIR1919Cal123,49Ind.Cas.79
Fletcher, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff against the decision of the learned Subordinate Judge of Noakhali, dated the 31st March 1916, affirming the decision of the Munsif of Sandwip. The plaintiff brought the suit for a declaration of a public right of way alleging special damage. The facts have been found in his favour by the lower Appellate Court; but the suit has been dismissed on a purely technical objection, namely, that the su,it is barred by the rule of res judicata. Now, the alleged res judicata arose in this manner. The plaintiff brought a former suit for a similar relief. The learned Judge on that former occasion dismissed the suit on the ground that the plaint did not disclose any cause of action and there being no allegation that the plaintiff had suffered any special damage. In dismissing the suit, however, the learned Judge remarked, and it was expressly stated, that the plaintiff was not debarred of any right to bring a fresh suit properly constructed. I do not...
Prionath Bose Vs. Srimaty Kusum Kumari Dassi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-1918
Reported in: 47Ind.Cas.332
1. This, is an appeal by the plaintiff against the judgment of the learned Additional District Judge of Midnapur, dated the 23rd August 1915, affirming the decision of the Munsif of the same place. The Plaintiff was the landlord. The defendant was an usufructuary mortgagee of the recorded tenant who had been put into possession and the plaintiff, therefore, sued the defendant to recover possession. What the learned Judge of the lower Appellate Court has found is this: He has found that the facts proved in this case do not show that the tenant abandoned the holding within the meaning of Section 87 of the Bengal Tenancy Act. But it is laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Dayamoyi v. Ananda Mohan Roy 27 Ind. Cas. 61 : 18 C.W.N. 971 : 42 C. 172 20 C.L.J. 52 (F.B.) that where the transfer is the sale of the whole holding the landlord, in the absence of his consent, is ordinarily entitled to enter on the holding, but where the transfer is of a part only of the holding or ...
Moulvi Ahmad Ali Vs. Srimati Jinnatunessa
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-15-1918
Reported in: 46Ind.Cas.491
1. In this case, the lower Appellate Court has refused to pass a decree for restitution of conjugal rights on the ground that the plaintiff has not a home which he can offer to his wife, he himself living in the house of the father of his second wife. It is also found that the plaintiff had charged his wife with unchastity. We agree with the Court below that the plaintiff is bound to provide a suitable residence for his wife if he wants restitution of conjugal rights and, he not having been able to do so, his suit has been rightly dismissed.2. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with costs....
Ashraf Ali Vs. Karm Ali and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-1918
Reported in: AIR1919Cal999,46Ind.Cas.927
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff against the decision of the learned Subordinate Judge of Chittagong, dated the 21st July 1916, modifying the decision of the Munsif of Hathazari. The plaintiff brought the suit to recover possession of certain lands in Chittagong which were within a Noabad Mahal. The case as opened here is this: The plaintiff has got a settlement from the Government. His suit has been defeated in the lower Appellate Court on the ground that the defendants are Noabad Talukdars, and, in the view of the learned Judge, a Noabad Talukdar may have a permanent interest and the Judge finds that the defendants have a permanent interest. It was said on behalf of the plaintiff-appellant that, having regard to the decision of this Court in the case of Prosunno Coomar Roy v. Secretary of State 26 C. 792 : 3 C.W.N. 695 : 13 Ind. Dec. (N.S.) 1107, a Noabad Talukdar could not have a permanent interest and, therefore, the view that the learned Judge took of the evidence before him ...
Maharaj Bahadur Singh Vs. Jadab Chandra Ghose Hazra
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-13-1918
Reported in: AIR1919Cal692,(1919)ILR46Cal347
Teunon and Richardson, JJ.1. This appeal arises out of a suit to recover arrears of putni rent. The taluk was created or confirmed by a kabuliat dated 25th Assar, 1257, corresponding with the 8th July, 1850. The rent reserved is therein stated to be 'Company's sicca rupees 96' and the question in controversy is whether the plaintiff landlords are entitled to Rs. 96 in current coin or the equivalent in current coin of 96 sicca rupees.2. The word 'sikka' or 'sicca,' meaning originally, it would seem, a die or stamp, came next to mean a 'stamped coin' and more particularly the silver coinage of the Kings of Dehi. Lastly, 'sicca rupiya' became, the name specially given to the rupee coined by the East India Company from the year 1773 and bearing inscriptions denoting that it had been struck by the King Shah Alam at Murshidabad in the 19th year of his reign. From Acts XVII of 1835 and XIII of 1836 it appears that this rupee being latterly coined only at the mint in Calcutta became known as t...
Bhagaban Chandra Kaibarta Das Vs. Ishan Chandra Kaibarta Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-13-1918
Reported in: AIR1919Cal893,46Ind.Cas.802
Fletcher, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant against the decision of the learned Subordinate Judge of Tipperah, dated the 14th August 1916, reversing the decision of the Officiating Munsif of Nabinagar. The suit was brought for declaration of title and for partition. Two questions have been raised in this appeal. First of all, that the appeal is not competent, and, secondly, that the suit is barred by limitation. The question as to whether the appeal is competent depends on these facts: The suit was instituted on the 5th July 1913. The preliminary decree was made on the 14th August 1915. The final decree was passed on the 11th November 1916 but it was not drawn up or signed till the 18th November 1916. In the meantime, on the 16th November 1916, the present appeal was preferred. It is said that the final decree having been passed at the date of the filing of the present appeal, the present appeal is not competent. The decision relied on in support of that view is the decision in t...
Maharaj Bahadur Singh Vs. Jadab Chandra Ghose Hazra and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-13-1918
Reported in: 47Ind.Cas.109
1. This appeal arises out of a suit to recover arrears of Patni rent. The taluk was created or confirmed by a Kabuliyat dated 25th Assar 1257, corresponding with the 8th July 1850. The rent reserved is therein stated to be Company's Sicca Rs. 96' and the question in controversy is whether the plaintiffs-landlords are entitled to Rs. 96 in current coin or the equivalent in current coin of 96 Sicca rupees.2. The word Sikka or Sicca, meaning originally, it would seem, a die or stamp, came next to mean a stamped coin and more particularly the silver coinage of the Kings of Delhi. Lastly Sicca rupiya' became the name specifically given to the rupee coined by the East India Company from the year 1773 and bearing inscriptions denoting that it had been struck by King Shah Alam at Murshidabad in the 19th year of his reign. From Acts XVII of 1835 and XIII of 1836 it appears that this rupee being latterly coined only at the mint in Calcutta became known as, the Calcutta Sicca rupee. The 1st of th...
Brojendra Kishore Roy Chowdhury Vs. Kali Kumar Chowdhury
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-10-1918
Reported in: AIR1919Cal815,(1919)ILR46Cal236
Teunon, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff to have it declared that certain partition proceedings now being conducted by the Revenue Authorities of Assam, under an order of the Board of Revenue of Eastern Bengal and Assam, dated 18/27th July, 1911, are ultra vires and contrary to the provisions of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation I of 1886.2. It appears that in the District of Sylhet, Dassona, taluk No. 3 Alam Raja and 5 other taluks, being permanently settled estates have specific shares in a mouzah named Dhal; the share of Alam Raja in that mouzah being 6 annas 15 gandas.3. All the taluks have lands or shares in other mouzahs but in no other mouzah is the said taluk Alam Raja a co-sharer with the other five estates or any one of them.4. The appellant for partition who is the defendant appellant before us, was the purchaser at a revenue sale in the year 1890 of the residuary share in Alam Raja. In the parent estate there had been opened three separate ...
Rajjab Ali Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-10-1918
Reported in: (1919)ILR46Cal60,50Ind.Cas.25
Shamsul Huda and Smither, JJ.1. The circumstances under which this Rule was issued are shortly these: In April 1917 there was a riot in the course of which one Hasanuddin received a lathi blow on the head which resulted in his death, Ali Newaz being the person who was alleged to have struck the fatal blow. In connection with this occurrence six persons, namely, Ali Newaz, Nabi Newaz, Hamid Ali, Surat Ali, Jafar Ali and Akram Ali, were tried together and on conviction under Sections 147 and 304/149 of the Indian Penal Code, Ali Newaz was sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment, Hamid Ali to three years, Nabi Newaz to eighteen months and the remaining three, viz., Surat Ali, Jafar Ali and Akram Ali, were sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonment. Rajjab Ali one of the accused in the case was tried subsequently, lie having been ill at the time of the trial of the other accused persons. Rajjab Ali, who was convicted last and sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonment, appeal...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »