Kolkata Court May 1919 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.
Satindra Nath Banerjee and ors. Vs. Kumar Banwari Mukunda Dass Nandy B ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-23-1919
Reported in: 54Ind.Cas.568
1. This appeal is against an order of the District Judge of Burdwan, seating aside an order of the Munsif of Katwa, dismissing a suit for default and remanding the case fur trial by the Munsif.2. It is contended on behalf of the defendant-appellant that no appeal lay to the District Judge because the order was net one under Order XVII, Rule 3 of the Code and that, therefore, the order of remand made by the District Judge was without jurisdiction.3. It appears that the main question involved in the suit related to boundary disputes and two Commissioners were successively appointed for laying the boundary. On the 4th January 1916, the Court directed the defendant to deposit Rs, 150 as additional costs for the fee of the Commissioner and the latter was directed to proceed with the work as prayed for by the defendant. The 3rd February 1916 was fixed for the hearing of the case. On the 3rd February the following order was made: 'The Pleader takes no steps to-day, the defendant is present by...
Separjan Alias Siperunnessa Bibi Vs. Ramdeb Rai
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-23-1919
Reported in: 55Ind.Cas.360
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for khas possession. The plaintiff is a co-sharer landlord. Defendant No. 4 Basiruddin was the original tenant of 10 kanis and 18 gandas, consisting of a homestead and cultivable land. He sold 2 kanis to defendant No. 1 in 1310 and gave possession. He was apparently very heavily indebted. He appears to have sold the rest of the land to his wife and then both of them joined in selling the same land to Hussan Ali and Rajjab Ali his wife's brother and brother's son. Then Hussan Ali and Rajjab Ali executed habuliyats in favour of the plaintiff. The learned Munsif held that the sale by Basiruddin, defendant No. 4, of the lards in Schedule 2 to his relations Hussan Ali and Rajjab Ali was a sham transaction made with the object of protecting the property from Basiruddin's creditors, that Basiruddin, although be purported to surrender the holding in Chaitra 1318 B.S., was still in possession of the lands of Schedule 2. He was, therefore, of opinion that Basi...
imam Ali Sikdar Vs. Karim Buksh Sheikh and MoynuddIn Mondal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-22-1919
Reported in: AIR1919Cal806,52Ind.Cas.401
Appeal No. 40 of 1917.Shamshul Huda, J.1. This is an appeal against an order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge of the Assam Valley Districts, affirming an order of the Munsif of Dhubri, dated the 25th of February 1916. The facts are shortly these: The plaintiff obtained a decree for ejectment against the defendant, who is the appellant before us. In the judgment the ejectment was made conditional upon payment of a certain sum of money by the plaintiff as compensation to the defendant and the date for such payment was fixed on or before the 17th October 1915. In the decree that was drawn up, nothing was said about the ejectment being conditional upon payment of the compensation money, but it only directed the plaintiff to make the payment within the date fixed. Against that decree, the defendant preferred an appeal which was dismissed, and shortly after the dismissal of the appeal, on the 23rd November 1915 the plaintiff made the deposit. The defendant objected to the money being ...
Rahmat Ali Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-22-1919
Reported in: 53Ind.Cas.147
Walmsley, J.1. This Rule raises an interesting question. It was obtained on. behalf of one Rahmat Ali, who says that he is a British subject residing at Tilinipara in the district of Hooghly. The necessary facts are as follows:2. On April 4th a Jamadar of the French Police came tot he Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Serampur with a 'delegation' from the Juge d' Instruction at Chandernagore. The 'delegation' directed the Jamadar, or Adjutant de Police, to proceed to Telinipara and, with the assistance of the British Police, to arrest Rah mat Ali on a charge of theft. The Magistrate directed the Sub-Inspector of Bhadreswar to assist in arresting Rah mat Ali, and on April 5 the petitioner was arrested and next day he was produced before the Magistrate who remanded him to custody, and ordered a letter to be written to the Bengal Government asking for an extradition warrant. On April 7th the Magistrate wrote a letter to the Bengal Government reporting that the Police had arrested one Rah mat A...
Sarbeswar Naik, Minor, by His Uncle and Next Friend Narendra Nath Naik ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-22-1919
Reported in: 51Ind.Cas.981
Newbould, J.1. This appeal arises out of a rent suit, the point in dispute being as to the rate of rent. Both the lower Courts have held that as the rent claimed by the plaintiffs was entered in the rent roll prepared under Part II, Chapter X of the Bengal Tenancy Act, it cannot now be disputed.2. It is contended on behalf of the appellants that the entry was not made under Part II of Chapter X but under Part III. From the judgments of both the lower Courts I cannot believe that it was ever disputed in either Court that this entry was made under Part II. Both the Courts below referred to this as an ascertained fact, and the lower Appellate Court commenced its judgment by saying 'The rent was settled by a Revenue Officer under Part II of Chapter X of the Bengal Tenancy Act.' I cannot believe that the learned District Judge would have made this statement in this form without any comment, if there had been any suggestion before him that the record had not been prepared under that p Articl...
Abdulla (Mea) Vs. Akhil Chandra Biswas, and on His Death His Heirs and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-22-1919
Reported in: 59Ind.Cas.84
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for ejectment of the defendant from a piece of land (10 cubits by 22 cubits) situated in the town of Chittagong.2. The Court of first instance gave a decree to the plaintiff for the western portion of the land and dismissed his claim with regard to the eastern portion. The decree has been affirmed on appeal.3. The defendant has preferred this appeal and the plaintiff has filed a cross-objection.4. It appears that a previous suit was instituted by the plaintiff against the defendant for ejectment. It is not clear from the judgment of the lower Court whether the whole of the land now in dispute was in dispute in the previous suit. But it is not very material to go into the question, because the previous suit was brought by the plaintiff for ejectment on the ground that the defendant was a trespasser and that he had no right whatever to the land. In the present suit also, in the first portion of prayer (Ka), the plaintiff claims possession on the very s...
Shed Ahamad Vs. Ibrahim and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-21-1919
Reported in: 52Ind.Cas.314
Newbould, J.1. This appeal arises out of a title suit in which the plaintiffs claimed khas possession of the lands of two schedules on declaration of their title thereto. The two plots of land in dispute are valued in the plaint at Rs. 20. The Munsif dismissed the suit. On appeal by one of the plaintiffs the Subordinate Judge granted the principal plaintiff a decree for half of the lands of the first schedule and also in respect of 14-annas share of the second schedule. The first defendant now appeals to this Court. The judgment of the Subordinate Judge is attacked on various grounds and I am asked to send the case back to him for re-hearing.2. The first point taken is that the learned Subordinate Judge has given the plaintiff a decree declaring his raiyati title when he claimed maliki title and repudiated the raiyati title. It appears, however, from the plaint that what the plaintiffs claimed was a maliki raiyati right, Maliki in itself is a term of no special meaning. It may mean pro...
Chandra Kishore Hadi Vs. Sheikh Kudrat Alias Debbiar Bap and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-21-1919
Reported in: 52Ind.Cas.480
Newbould, J.1. The plaintiff brought the suit nut of which this appeal arises for declaration of his debutter title to and for khas possession of certain land. His claim was principally based on an entry in the Record of Rights. The first Court held that the presumption arising from that entry had not been rebutted and decreed the suit. The lower Appellate Court on appeal by the defendants held in effect that the presumption had been rebutted and dismissed the suit. The arguments in this appeal are based on an unfortunate remark in the judgment of the Additional Judge. He says 'I consider that the Record of Rights requires good corroboration before any presumption can be said to arise therefrom.' That is not a correct statement of law. If the law provides that the presumption arises under certain circumstances, that presumption must arise independently of whether there is any corroboration or not. But reading the judgment as a whole, it is clear that the learned Judge considered the Re...
Jogesh Chandra Roy Vs. the Secretary of State for India in Council and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-21-1919
Reported in: AIR1919Cal724,53Ind.Cas.124
Newbould, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of possession of a piece of land on declaration of the plaintiff's title. The plaintiff succeeded in the suit, but in granting the decree the Munsif overlooked the fact that he claimed mesne profits for the period of dispossession. The plaintiff appealed to the District Judge of Chittagong claiming mesne profits, bat that appeal was dismissed and the plaintiff has now appealed to this Court. As the plaintiff has succeeded in establishing that he had been kept out of possession of the land to which he was entitled, he should be allowed reasonable mesne profits for the period during which he was dispossessed, subject, of course, to any law of limitation.2. On my suggesting that it would be to the interest of the parties to come to an agreement as to the sum payable for mesne profits, the learned Pleader for the appellant conceded that his client who is a wealthy Zemindar would be well content to accept any sum which may be awar...
Biswambhar Mandal Vs. Nasarat Ali
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-20-1919
Reported in: AIR1919Cal729,52Ind.Cas.355
Newbould, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit in ejectment. It was contested on several grounds before the lower Appellate Court, but now the only contention is that the defendant-appellant is an under-raiyat and as such cannot be ejected without notice. It is stated in the judgment of the lower Appellate Court that the contesting defendants are the transferees of one Sarafat Ali who was an under-tenant of Judhistir and Ram-ratan. The plaintiff has been found to be a holder of a Putni tenure. He brought a rent suit against his occupancy raiyats, Judhistir and Ramratan, and in execution of the decree he purchased the holding. Both the Courts below have found that the purchase of the plaintiff in this rent suit was collusive. It is contended that the plaintiff by his purchase obtained no higher rights than he would have got in a private sale. It appears to me that the appeal must fail on the ground 'that the appellant as a transferee of an under-raiyati interest had no interest in the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »