Kolkata Court July 1919 Judgments
Basanta Kumar Sarkar and anr. Vs. Sukhomoy Mondal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-28-1919
Reported in: 54Ind.Cas.763
Syed Shamsul Huda, J.1. I think this Rule must be made absolute. The suit has been dismissed on the ground that the plaintiff had failed to prove the existence of the relationship of landlord and tenant between him and the defendants. My attention has been drawn to the fact that there was a, previous rent decree to which all the defendants were parties. The learned Judge refers to this decree, but says that it is not shown that any payment was made towards the satisfaction of this decree. It seems to me, on the authority of the decisions of this Court in the case of Raj Kumar Boy v. Alimaddi 16 Ind. Cas. 911 : 17 C.W.N. 627 and in the case of Mohammad Gowhar Ali v. Samiruddin Sheikh 22 Ind. Cas. 383 : 18 C. W. N. 33 at p. 37 that a rent decree though only ex parte is res judicata on the question of the existence of the relationship of landlord and tenant. The case must be remanded to the Court below for the determination of the other issue, namely, what was the amount of rent payable b...
Tag this Judgment!Kali Dayal Bhattacharjee and ors. Vs. Nagendra Nath Pakrashi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-28-1919
Reported in: 54Ind.Cas.822
1. This is an appeal by the defendants in a suit for declaration of title to immoveable property. The case for the plaintiffs is that there were disturbances in connection with the lands in suit which led to the institution of proceedings under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code : with the result that, on the 24th July 1910, the Criminal Court made an order of attachment under Section 146, Criminal Procedure Code, to remain in force until the title to the lands was declared by a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction. A Accordingly, on the 28th September 1910, the plaintiffs instituted the present suit for declaration that the disputed lands appertained in Zemindary right, and right acquired by adverse possession, to their property known as Thal Chur or as Khas Thal Mouza. The defendants repudiated all the material allegations in the plaint. After a protracted trial in the Court below, the suit was decreed by the Subordinate Judge. The decree in favour of the plaintiffs was in the fol...
Tag this Judgment!Joseph Perry Vs. the Official Assignee of Calcutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-28-1919
Reported in: 56Ind.Cas.778
John Woodroffe, J.1. The insolvent is charged under Section 103A (1) of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act (III of 1909) with four offenses. I dealnow only with the charges upon which he has been convicted and which are the subject of appeal. These charges are (1) that the appellant on the 5th March 1919, fraudulently and with intent to conceal the state of his affairs and to defeat the objects of the Act, purposely withheld the production of his diary for the years 1918 and 1919 and his stock or invoice book, (2) that he, fraudulently with intent to conceal the state of his affairs and to defeat the objects of the said Act on the 7th March wilfully prevented the production of pages 5--22 of his stock book by removing or causing to be removed the said pages from the said book, the said pages and book relating to such of his affairs as are subject to investigation under the said Act; (3) that he, fraudulently and with intent to conceal the state of his affairs and to defeat the objects...
Tag this Judgment!Prasunna (Prasunnamoyi in Vakalatnama) Ghoshami Vs. Gopal Lal Sinha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-25-1919
Reported in: 55Ind.Cas.737
Walmsley, J.1. This appeal arises out of a dispute about the cost of erecting a house. The plaintiff built a house for the defendant, and be sued to recover Rs. 606-7-0 for labour and materials and Rs. 188 for interest. The first Court gave him a decree for Rs. 308-14 with interest at 6 per centum. Both sides appealed, and the learned District Judge made a slight modification in favour of the plaintiff, but dismissed the defendant's appeal.2. The defendant has preferred this second appeal. Two arguments are put forward on her behalf, one relates to the amount to be deducted from the plaintiff's bill in consideration of the bricks provided by the defendant, and the other is as to the defendant's liability for interest.3. So far as the bricks are concerned, the learned Judge's finding as to the number supplied is one which cannot be challenged in this Court.4. The argument that the defendant is not liable for interest raises a more substantial question. The learned Munsif allowed interes...
Tag this Judgment!Debendra Chandra Sarkar and ors. Vs. Messrs Purusottam Das and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-25-1919
Reported in: 55Ind.Cas.186
Ernest Fletcher, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by three insolvents against the judgment of the learned District Judge of the 24-Per. gannas, dated the 13th March 1919, adjudicating them and another person insolvents under the provisions of the Provincial Insolvency Act. The ad judication was made at the instance and on the petition of certain creditors. It is not suggested that the debts were not sufficient on which an insolvency petition could, be filed, but the points taken are these. That adjudication is against four persons who are described as carrying on business within the jurisdiction of the Court under the name and style of so and so. That is the ordinary way of making a petition against the debtors who are carrying on business in co partnership; and the name of the firm is ordinarily used when the names of the partners are not known. The act of insolvency alleged is this that with intent to defeat or delay the creditors, the debtors, within one week before the petition, ma...
Tag this Judgment!Raja Kristo Das Law and ors. Vs. KalimuddIn Bhuia and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-25-1919
Reported in: 55Ind.Cas.507
Syed Shamsul Huda, J.S.A. No. 1678 OF 19181. This appeal arises out of a suit for rent with interest at 2 per cent, per mensem. The liability for the rent was not denied by the tenants. No written statement was filed, and it was not necessary in such cases to file a written statement. The plaintiffs in their plaint alleged that the rent claimed was in respect of a shikmi kaimi taluk with a rent of 49 rupees payable per annum. The defendants on the day of hearing filed a petition, in which they stated that the claim for interest at the rate of 2 rupees per cent. per mensem, was an exorbitant and penal rate. There was no allegation that the Jama was not a permanent Jama. But in their plaint the plaintiffs also did not say anything as regards the fixity of rent. The Courts below have not based their decision on the question as to whether the rate of interest was or was not penal, and I doubt if on the authorities it could be held that the rate was a penal rate. But the decision is based o...
Tag this Judgment!Nalinakshya Dutta Vs. Dhan Krishna Mondal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-25-1919
Reported in: 56Ind.Cas.282
Syed Shamsul Huda, J.1. In this case the appeal is mainly based on the ground that having regard to the provisions of Section 153 of the Bengal Tenancy Act, no appeal lay before the learned District Judge, and that, therefore, his decision reversing the decree of the first Court was without jurisdiction. The Court below relied upon an unreported decision of this Court which was referred to in Mr. Sen's book on the Bengal Tenancy Act. I had the advantage of reading the judgment of Mr. Justice Mitra in that case and it seems to me that on the authority of that decision, with which I agree, an appeal lay to the Court below. Therefore, the main ground of appeal fails.2. It has been next argued that the learned Judge in dealing with the appeal came to certain findings different from those arrived at by the first Court in connection with a title suit connected with the rent suit out of which this appeal arises. In that suit the decision of the Munsif was accepted by the parties and no one ap...
Tag this Judgment!Gunpat Rai Khbmka Vs. W. G. Good
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1919
Reported in: 53Ind.Cas.622
Sanderson, C.J.1. Two Rules have been issued, one No. 529 and the other No 560, and they were in connection with certain proceedings which were taken against one Ganpat Rai Khemka, who was alleged to have committed a breach of the provisions contained in Section 83 of the Calcutta Port Act of 1890, and to have committed an offence under Section 84, The proceedings were taken before Mr. Das Gupta, who on the 8th of May of this year was acting, as we are informed, on behalf of the Chief Presidency Magistrate; and the most important point which has been raised in respect of Rule No. 529 is whether the Presidency Magistrate had jurisdiction over the matter. The alleged offence admittedly took place outside the limits of Calcutta, but admittedly within the limits of the part of Calcutta: and, the argument of the learned Vakil, who obtained the Rule in No. 529, shortly stated, is that although the Presidency Magistrate may have jurisdiction outside the limits of Calcutta but within the limit...
Tag this Judgment!Manohar Mookerjee Vs. Raja Peary Mohan Mookerjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1919
Reported in: 54Ind.Cas.6
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff in a suit for the construction of a Will, for the administration of a trust (private debuttar) created thereby, for the removal of the trustee, for the appointment of a new trustee or receiver, for declaration that an execution sale of a portion of the trust estate held on the 14th January 1913, when it was purchased by the son of the trustee was invalid and inoperative, for proper investment of a sum of Rs. 11,500 alleged to form part of the trust estate, and for other incidental reliefs. The Subordinate Judge has found in favour of the plaintiff upon several of the questions in controversy, but he has dismissed the suit on the ground that the allegations of misconduct have not been established and the plaintiff is not entitled to ask for the removal of the trustee. To appreciate the substantial points in dispute, between the parties (whose relation, ship will appear from the annexed genealogical table), it is necessary to consider briefly the his...
Tag this Judgment!Jogendsa Nath Singh and ors. Vs. Mohanlal Khan and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1919
Reported in: 58Ind.Cas.995
1. This appeal arises out of a suit to recover the value of paddy due upon a mortgage bond by the sale of immoveable properties mortgaged to the plaintiffs' predecessor.2. The Court of first instance gave a decree to the plaintiff but that decree was reversed on appeal by the learned Subordinate Judge on the ground that it was not a suit to enforce payment of money charged upon immoveable property and that, therefore, Article 132 of the Limitation Act did not apply. He relied upon the decision in the case of Rash Bihari Das v. Kunjabihari Patra 37 Ind. Cas. 807 : 24 C.L.J. 348. All the terms of the mortgage-bond, and specially the conditions under which the mortgage was to be enforced in default of payment, however, do not appear from the report of that case.3. On the other hand, in the case of Nilmoney Sinha v. Hardhan Das 2 Ind. Cas. 111 : 13 C.W.N. CLXXXIV (184) notes, where the deed recited that the land was given to secure payment of interest in kind, Mookerjee, J., held: 'The sub...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »