Kolkata Court June 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.
Rames Chandra Chakrabarti and ors. Vs. Sasi Bhusas Upadhay
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1919
Reported in: 53Ind.Cas.654
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs in a suit for recovery of possession of land with mesne profits upon declaration of title. The disputed property admittedly belonged to one Mahim Chandra Chakra barti, and upon his death, which took place on the 27th June 1892, passed to his widow Monmohini, who died on the 2th October 1915. The plaintiffs are the four sons of Umesh Chandra Chakrabarti, the brother of Mahim Chandra Chakrabarti, who died in 1908, and they claim the estate of their uncle as reversionary heirs after the death of their aunt The defendant is the son of Annapurna, a sister of Mahim and Umesh, and claims title to the property by purchase under a conveyance executed on the 16th June 18y5 by Monmohini and Umesh. The Subordinate Judge has held that the plaintiffs have failed to prove that the conveyance does not operate against them and has dismissed the suit. On the present appeal, the substantial point for investigation is, whether the conveyance in favour of the defendan...
Mir Moze Ali Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1919
Reported in: 54Ind.Cas.58
Walmsley, J.1. This Rule was issued at the instance of a head constable Mir Moze Ali and a constable Belat Ali. The former has been convicted under Section 384, Section 342 read with Section 114 : Section 354 read with Section 109, Section 323 read with Section 109 and Section 448 of the Penal Code, while the latter has been convicted under Section 384 read with Section 109, and Sections 354, 323, 448 and 842 of the Penal Code. Eassh of them has been sentenced to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment.2. In the Rule issued by us the District Magistrate was asked to show cause why the convictions should not be set aside, or an order passed directing that the petitioners be committed for trial to the Court of Session.3. The facts are as follows: In September ah dacoity was committed in a village within the jurisdiction of Uzirpur Thana, to the staff of which the petitioners belong. A man named Golam Ali was arrested and he made a confession implicating one Dalai Khan. The investigating...
Kumud Bandhu Saha Vs. Ramesh Chandra Saha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-06-1919
Reported in: AIR1919Cal759(2),(1919)ILR46Cal749
Teunon, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit forestablishment of title, recovery of possession, mesneprofits and accounts.2. One Raj Chandra Saha of Brahmanberiah died on the 19th Chait, 1308 (2-4-1902) leaving him surving his son Kailash Chandra Saha and a widow Mahamaya. Kailash married one Radharani and died on the 5th Poush, 1310 (December, 1903). Radharani died on the 12th Aswin, 1319, that is, the 28th of September, 1912.3. By his will dated 9th Poush, 1307 (24th December, 1900), Raj Chandra dedicated his 4 annas share in a certain brahmottar mouza to the service of certain deities, and directed that' Mahamaya should be shebait and that on her death the son Kailash should succeed her in that office. His other immoveable properties he divided between Kailash and Mahamaya, bequeathing 12 annas to Kailash, and 4 annas to Mahamaya for her life. He next authorised Mahamaya to adopt three sons in succession, whether in the lifetime of Kailash or after his death, and provided that on M...
Nawab Khaseh Habibullah Saheb and ors. Vs. Khajeh Soleman Quader and o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-06-1919
Reported in: 53Ind.Cas.764
1. This is an appeal by the defendants in a suit for recovery of money claimed for arrears of maintenance allowance and for the cost of construction of a house. The claim for allowance has been decreed by, the trial Court, while the claim for cost of erection of the house has been dismissed. The plaintiffs have not preferred a cross, appeal with regard to the portion of the claim disallowed by the Court below, and we are consequently concerned in this appeal solely with the question of the validity of the claim for arrears of-maintenance allowance. That claim is based on a document called a 'deed of agreement' executed by the late Nawab Sir Asanulla of Dacca, father of the 1st defendant. A brief recital of the family history of the defendants and of the events which led up to the agreement in question is necessary for the appreciation of the questions in controversy between the parties.2. Khaja Abdulla, who came from Cashmere, set up an extensive trading business in the town of Dacce, ...
Monmohan Dey Vs. Surabala Dasi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-05-1919
Reported in: 54Ind.Cas.51
Walmsley, J.1. This rule was obtained by one Mon Mohan De--the respondent in a proceeding under Section 483, Criminal Procedure Code. It appears that on the 11th November last year, the opposite party made an application to the Court of Presidency Magistrate under that section and on that a rule was issued. After some adjournments, the matter was transferred to the Honorary Magistrate Mr. Rustomji for disposal and in his Court the present petitioner and the woman--the opposite party--and the child were examined. Then there were frequent adjournments for one cause or another and eventually, on the 3rd April 1919, the rule was discharged on the ground that there were no witnesses for the prosecution present, On the 10th April 1919 the woman made a fresh application before the Chief Presidency Magistrate and a Rule was again issued upon the present petitioner and the proceedings instituted on that Rule are now pending. We have been asked to quash those proceedings, and the ground on which...
Baranashi Mazumdar and ors. Vs. Sudarasan Das Mahanta and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-05-1919
Reported in: 55Ind.Cas.784
1. This is an appeal by the representatives of the 3rd defendant in a suit instituted by the plaintiff for establishment of his right as Shebait to five shrines and for recovery of dedicated properties appurtenant thereto. There is also a claim for the recovery of the personal properties of the deceased Mohunt. There were three defendants in the suit. The first is a nominee of the late Mohunt; the other two are the representatives of the founder of one of the shrines, namely, the shrine of Lakhshmi Janardan Jew Thakur. In the Court below, the plaintiff entered into a compromise with the 1st defendant in respect of four of these shrines and a consent decree was made in his favour. There was, however, a contest between the plaintiff and the other defendants in respect of the fifth shrine and a decree has been made in favour of the plaintiff. On the present appeal, the controversy has been limited to the Shebait-ship of the properties of this shrine alone. There are really two points for ...
Tarakanta Das Chowdhury and ors. Vs. Kali Prasad (Kali Prasunna) Das G ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-04-1919
Reported in: AIR1919Cal447,53Ind.Cas.1001
Walmsley, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the plaintiffs and it arises in the following manner. The plaintiffs filed a suit (No. 298 of 1913) in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Barieal for a declaration of their Zemindari right to some land, and they valued the suit at Rs. 5,100. The defendants urged that the valuation was excessive, and that the true value was not more than Rs. 1,000. The learned Subordinate Judge went into this question and found that the value of the property in suit was Rs. 1,385 and as there was then at Barisal a Munsif empowered to try suits up to Rs. 2,000 in value, he returned the plaint to be presented in the Munsif's Court. The plaintiffs amended the valuation and presented the plaint in the Munsif's Court under protest, and shortly afterwards preferred this appeal against the Subordinate Judge's order.2. A preliminary objection was raised to the effect that the plaintiffs, having complied with the order, could not be allowed to question it, and in sup...
Khagendranarayan Roy Burman Vs. Bamni Barmani
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-02-1919
Reported in: 54Ind.Cas.228
1. This appeal arises out of a suit under Section 77 of the Registration act for registration of a mortgage bond for Rs. 1,000, said to have been executed by two ladies : one of them admitted execution and the document was registered so far as she was concerned, the other denied and the Sub-Registrar refused registration on the 4th August 1914. On appeal the District Registrar refused registration en the 9th November 1914. This suit was filed on the 8th December 1914 before the Munsif, being then valued at Rs. 500, On the 16th September 1915, the Munsif held that it had not been properly valued. The plaint was then amended and 'for the purposes of jurisdiction of the Court ' the suit was valued at Rs. 1,100. The Munsif then held that it exceeded the limit of his jurisdiction and he returned the plaint on the 14th December 1915. It was then presented before the Subordinate Judge on the 16th December 1915, who dismissed the suit on the ground that it was barred by-limitation. The Distric...
Joynath Sarkar Vs. Hari Mohan Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-02-1919
Reported in: 59Ind.Cas.469
1. The plaintiff claims to be a service tenure-holder of the land in suit which is the debutter property of an idol, under defendants Nos. 1 and 2, the shebaits. He made preparations for the worship and sheba of the idol and his father did similar service before him. He held this land in lieu of remuneration for the service he rendered and paid Rs. 12 a year to the shebaits as cesses. This amount used to be Rs. 7 but it was enhanced to Rs. 12. He made default in payment of this amount on account of which a Suit (No. 898 of 1911) was instituted against him by defendants Nos. 1 and 2. It was decreed and in execution of that decree the jote was put up for sale and was purchased by defendant No. 3 on the 4th October 1912. The plaintiff then instituted this suit on the 20th April 1916 to recover possession of the jote alleging that the former suit was fraudulent; that he knew nothing about it; that in fact a wrong person, a name-sake of his, had been served, and that he know nothing about t...
Bhuramull Banka Vs. the Official Assignee of Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-02-1919
Reported in: 56Ind.Cas.337
Lancelot Sanderson, C.J.1. This is an appeal by the insolvent against en order of committal made by Rankin, J. 2. On the hearing of the appeal, the merits of the matter were not discussed by the learned Counsel for the insolvent and no attempt was made to justify his conduct.3. It appears that the appellant was adjudicated insolvent on the 21st March 1919 at the instance of a creditor, and shortly before that, viz., on the 26th February 1919, a suit in which the insolvent's grandmother was the plaintiff and the insolvent was defendant was filed, and in that suit by consent of the parties the Official Receiver was appointed on the 10th March 1019 receiver of the book-debts, outstandings, cash, money, properties and assets of the insolvent's firm.4. Notice of an application for an order of committal dated the 5th May 1919 was served on the insolvent on the 6th May. The notice was as follows:Take notice that on Tuesday the 13th day of May 1919 at 11 o'clock in the forenoon or so soon ther...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›