Kolkata Court July 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.
Nawabiada Khajeh Atikulla and ors. Vs. Nawab Khajeh Habibulla
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1919
Reported in: 53Ind.Cas.773
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs in a suit for recovery of the office of Mutawalli and, as ancilliary thereto, far possession and control of the properties covered by a Wakf. The Wakf in question was executed on the 6th May 1846, and it is alleged by the plaintiffs that the last Mutwalli, Nawab Sir Salimullah of Dacos, died on the 16th January 1915. They pray for reliefs in the alternative as follows: first, that the first plaintiff may be declared to be the Mutwalli appointed in accordance with the long-established custom and usage of the family and in conformity with the provisions of the deed of Wakf; secondly, if the court should come to the conclusion that the first plaintiff has not been validly appointed Mutwalli, the Court may issue orders for the nomination and election of the Mutwalli by the members of the family and thereafter to appoint the person so nominated. The defendant denied the claim and alleged that he had been duly nominated and appointed Mutwalli by his fat...
Nirod Krishna Pal and ors. Vs. Indra Bhusan Gupta and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1919
Reported in: AIR1919Cal805,53Ind.Cas.975
Syed Shamsul Huda, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought under the provisions of Section 106 of the Bengal Tenancy Act and relates to Dag No. 129 of the Settlement Khatian. In the record the plaintiffs' names are entered as occupancy raiyats in respect of an undivided 1/3rd share of this plot and as tenure-holders in respect of the remaining 2/3rds. Plaintiffs' case is that the whole Dag is within Mehal No. 2685 and they have Howla right to the whole of the Dag. This Dag is according to the Thak included in two different Mehals Nos.2661 and 2385, 1/3rd falling within the former and 2/3rds within the latter. The Assistant Settlement Officer decreed the plaintiffs' suit and held that they were Howladars in respect of the whole Dag. He doubted the correctness of the Thak, but held that even if correct there is no proof that some arrangements were not made between the proprietors of the two estates after the Thak survey by which the entire plot in suit came to be held by proprietor...
Sasi Bhusan Bhador Vs. Basanta Lal Bhar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1919
Reported in: 54Ind.Cas.518
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of possession of 7 1/2 bighas of land, on the allegation that the land was dedicated to the deity 'Ganesh Janani', and that the plaintiffs were appointed she-baits under an arpannama dated 12th Falgun 1315 B.S. executed by one Dhankumari. It is further alleged that they had been in possession thereof until they were dispossessed in 1319.2. The defence was that by a subsequent deed dated the 26th Bhadra 1316, Dhan. kumari Dasi made a gift of the property in favour of the defendant subject to a charge in favour of the Thakur, and that by a still later deed dated 7th Assin 1316, she revoked the first deed of dedication dated 12th Falgun 1315 altogether,3. The Court of first instance dismissed the suit. On appeal the decree of the Court of first instance wag reversed and the plaintiffs' suit decreed.4. Two questions have been raised in appeal before us. The first is whether there was an absolute dedication of the property under the arpannama...
Badarud DIn Biswas and ors. Vs. Herajtulla Joordar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1919
Reported in: 54Ind.Cas.797
Ernest Fletcher, J.1. The defendants in this case appeal against the decision of the learned Additional Judge of Jessore, dated the 30th January 1917, affirming the decision of the Munsif of Jhenidah. The plaintiffs brought the suit for declaration of title to and possession of certain land. The title pleaded in the plaint, according to the English translation of the vernacular document, was that the plaintiffs claimed a subordinate intermediate tenure, and those words are strengthened by the nature of the enjoyment that the plaintiffs alleged they had in the land in suit. What happened was this. The learned Judge in the lower Appellate Court has found that the plaintiffs are not either tenure-holders or under-tenure holders bat are raiyats with rights of occupancy, and in this case the defendants are not entitled to annul the interest of the plaintiffs under the provisions of the Bengal Tenancy Act. Whether that can be supported turns on this : whether the English translation of the a...
Sheikh Nasarat Vs. Kali Das Chakerbutty
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1919
Reported in: 54Ind.Cas.750
Syed Shamsul Huda, J.1. This is a suit for ejectment in accordance with the provisions of Section 49 of the Bengal Tenancy Act. The plaintiff's case is that he is a raiyal and the defendant is his under raiyat, and that the defendant holds under a written lease the term of which has expired. The first Court held that the plaintiff was a tenure-holder and the defendant was an occupancy raiyat, and upon that view of the case dismissed the plaintiff's suit. In appeal the decree of the first Court was reversed.2. It appears that in the Record of Rights the defendant is described as an occupancy raiyat. The learned Subordinate Judge who disposed of the appeal was of opinion that the presumption arising out of this entry had been rebutted by the fact that there was other evidence showing that the plaintiff was a raiyat at fixed rent and that the defendant was necessarily an under raiyat and liable to ejectment.3. It is argued on behalf of the defendant-appellant that having regard to the pro...
Bejoy Lal Seal and ors. Vs. Nayan Munjari Dassi, Heir and Widow of Lat ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1919
Reported in: 55Ind.Cas.639
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs in a suit for declaration of title to the surplus sale-proceeds of a sale held under the Revenue Sale Law, 1859. The case for the plaintiffs is that holding No. 130, Division 1, Sub-Division 17, within the jurisdiction of the Collector of 24-Pergannas, was sold for arrears of revenue on the 16th March 1908 for Rs. 11,100 and that after satisfaction of the dues of the Government, Rs. 11,050 approximately is in deposit in the Collectorate. The exact sum, as appears from the written statement of the Secretary of State who was originally made a respondent, is Rs. 11,085-7-6. At the time of the sale, the registered proprietors were members of the Paikpara Raj family of Singhs, Girish Chandra, Purna Chandra, Kanti Chandra, Indra Chandra and Sarat Chandra. The plaintiffs assert that although the Singhs were registered proprietors, they had no subsisting interest in the holding on the date of default or of sale. The allegation is that the property had ves...
Trailokya Nath Nath Vs. Radhasundari Debi, Minor, by Her Father and Gu ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1919
Reported in: 55Ind.Cas.704
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff in a suit for recovery of possession of land on establishment of title by purchase. The property belonged to one Babu Lal Nath, and, upon his death, was inherited by his three sons, all of whom were dead at the date of the institution of this suit. The first defendant is the widow of the eldest son and has admittedly inherited one-third share of the property. The dispute relates to the remaining two-thirds share. The second defendant is the widow of the original owner and claims to have inherited this two-thirds share on the death of her second and third sons, both of whom were unmarried. The ease for the plaintiff is that be has purchased their two-thirds share from the second defendant. The case for the first defendant, on the other hand, is that the second defendant, her mother-in-law, became unchaste, shortly after the death of her husband Babu Lal, and, consequently, never succeeded to the estate left by her two sons, which accordingly passed ...
Jagat Chandra Chowdhury and ors. Vs. Biswambhar Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1919
Reported in: 55Ind.Cas.743
Fletcher, J.1. In this case, the plaintiffs appeal against the decision of the learned District Judge of Dacca, dated the 21st January 1918, affirming the decision of the fifth Subordinate Judge of the same place. The plaintiffs brought the suit to recover possession of certain land. What happened is this. In 1856, the property belonged to one Ananda Mohan. He died leaving him surviving his widow Raj Mohi and a daughter by a predeceased wife, the name of such daughter being Janaki Dasi. On the 18th January 1908 Raj Mohi sold to the defendants Nos. 2 and 3 the property by a kobala of that date. Raj Mohi died in April 1909. On the 9th December 1909, Janaki Dasi, that is, the daughter of Ananda, Mohan, by a conveyance sold and conveyed the same property to the plaintiffs. To that conveyance, the then reversionary heirs, namely, the defendants Nos. 17, 18 and 19, who are the sons of Janaki Dasi, assented and they also joined in the conveyance. Janaki Dasi died in 1910. The plaintiffs broug...
Prasanna Kumar Sil Vs. Kamini Sundari Dasi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-21-1919
Reported in: 55Ind.Cas.251
1. This is a suit for ejectment on the ground that the defendant is an under-raiyat and is liable to ejectment upon notice, which the plaintiffs allege they served on him. It is common ground that Mousa was an occupancy raiyat in respect of the land in suit under certain Lakherajdars whose Lakheraj interest subsequently passed to the Gouripu Zemindars. The plaintiffs' case is that their father Ful Chand had purchased the occupancy right of Mousa about 40 years before suit and that after such purchase Mousa retained possession of the holding and was paying rent to Ful Chand as an under raiyat. The fact that Ful Chand was in receipt of such rent is not denied. The defendant, however, alleges that Ful Chand, somehow by arrangement with the Lakherajdars, he being their Pleader, got himself recognised as a middleman between the Zemindar and Mousa the tenant. It is denied that Ful Chand ever purchased the interest of Mousa. The defendant says that in 1894, he purchased the occupancy right fr...
Raja Promada Nath Roy Bahadur Vs. Abdul Majid Munshi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-17-1919
Reported in: AIR1919Cal242(1),53Ind.Cas.480
Shamsul Hoda, J.1. This application arises out of a suit for rent. The suit was dismissed by the first Court and the dismissal was upheld on appeal. It appears that the defendant No. 17, Sakina Khatun, died when the case was pending in appeal before the lower Appellate Court and the appeal proceeded without her heirs being substituted. We are asked now in the appeal preferred to this Court to substitute the heirs of Sakina Khatun. It seems to me that the question of substitution can only arise where there is a death pending a suit or appeal. In this case, the death having taken place before the appeal in the lower Appellate Court was decided and not while the appeal was pending in this Court, I do not think we can order the substitution prayed for. The Rule is accordingly discharged. The costs of the minor opposite party represented by the Deputy Registrar having already been paid, we make no order as to costs.2. If the applicant has any remedy, he has to make a proper application to t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »