Kolkata Court August 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.
Radharaman Chowdhuri and ors. Vs. Gopal Chandra Chakravarty
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-25-1919
Reported in: 56Ind.Cas.122
1. This appeal arises out of an application for Probate of a Will. The respondent Gopal Chandra propounded a Will said to have been executed by one Krishna Chandra. The appellants Radha Raman and others, who are the grandfather's daughter's son's sons of the deceased, opposed the application. The learned District Judge held that the appellants had no locus standi to oppose the grant, and that Probate would be granted to the respondent on proof of the Will in common form. Radha Raman and others have appealed to this Court and an application also has. been made under Section 115, Code of Civil Procedure, against the order of the Court below.2. It has been held in several oases that no appeal lies against such an order. The order, however, can be revised upon the application under Section 115, Code of Civil Procedure.3. The opposite party being the brother of the sister's husband of the deceased is a perfect stranger to the family, but the Court below held that the petitioners were not he...
Beni Madhab Sukul anr. Vs. Upendra Chandra Singha and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-21-1919
Reported in: 53Ind.Cas.747
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs in a suit for settlement of accounts. They allege that on the 23rd December 1901 the 1st defendant was appointed by the District Judge of Tipperah to be common manager of their taluk under the provisions of the Bengal Tenancy Act and that he continued to act in that capacity till the 28th February 1914. The plaintiffs further allege that on the 14th December 1912 the District Judge released one third share of the taluk from the management of the defendant. The plaintiffs accordingly pray (a) for a direction upon the 1st defendant to submit regular accounts for the entire period of his management; (b) for an examination of the accounts that are submitted; (c) for recovery of the amount that may, upon an examination of the accounts, be found due in respect of their shares; (d) for recovery of Rs. 500 as costs of preparation of the papers, should the defendant fail to submit regular accounts within the time allowed by the Court; and (e) for recovery ...
Kalidaa Chaudhury and ors. Vs. Prasanna Kumar Das and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-21-1919
Reported in: 55Ind.Cas.189
1. This is an appeal by the mortgagee defendants in a suit to enforce a mortgage security. On the 9th September 1902, the mortgagor defendant executed a mortgage in favour of the plaintiffs to secure a loan of Rs. 1,900, which was to cany interest at 33 per cent. per annum and was to be repaid on the 14th January 1903. On the 4th March 1904, a sum of Rs. 500 was paid by the mortgagor on account of interest. No further payment was made and on the 6th January 1915, the mortgagees instituted the present suit for recovery of their dues. The mortgagor was made the 1st defendant. Four other persons were also joined as defendants, on the allegation that they were puisne encumbrancers who had taken a mortgage on the 12th February 1804. The mortgagor defendant did not enter appearance. The mortgagee defendants contested the claim substantially on two grounds, namely, first, that the mortgage in favour of the plaintiffs was fictitious, and secondly, that they were entitled to priority in respect...
YasIn Ali Mirdha and ors. Vs. Radha Gobinda Chaudhuri and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-21-1919
Reported in: 55Ind.Cas.180
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs in a suit for declaration that an order for partition of an estate made by the Sub-Divisional Officer of Sunamganj on the 15th April 1913 and confirmed successively by the Deputy Commissioner of Sylhet on the 14th July 1913, by the Commissioner on the 6th December 1913 and by the Chief Commissioner on the 22nd November 1914, was without jurisdiciton and was consequently inoperative in law. The case for the plaintiffs is that they objected to the applications for partition presented by the defendants to the Revenue Authorities, on the ground that some of the lands of the estates sought to be partitioned were joint with the lands of other estates and the Revenue Authorities were not competent, under the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation 1886, to effect a partition of lands included in several estates. This objection was overruled as untenable. The substantial matter in controversy in the present litigation is the question of the legality of the orde...
In Re: Pasupati Mukherjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-21-1919
Reported in: 56Ind.Cas.431
Rankin, J.1. In this case I think there is power on the facts of the present case to make the order which is asked for under Section 11 of Act HI of 1913. This estate consists of shares, some of which, though by no means necessarily all of which, may want looking after in the sense that their value may be going up and down, also in the sense that dividends require to be collected, and farther in the sense that bonus shares may require to be applied for and obtained in order that the most may be made of the deceased's estate. It is not disputed that the suggestion that the Administrator-General should have the estate tinder Section 11, would be anything except' a convenient and cheap method to make sure that this property should not come to any harm; but on behalf of the respondents to this motion, Mr. Sen has argued before me that in view of the fast that the applicant here alleges that there is a Will and a valid Will, of which he had been appointed executor, and notwithstanding the f...
ilim Molla and anr. Vs. Manindra Mohan Poddar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-21-1919
Reported in: 56Ind.Cas.801
1. This is an appeal against an order of the District Judge of Dacca made in affirmance of an order of the Court of first instance to the effect that the appellants are liable to satisfy a decree for costs made in favour of the respondent in a suit to enforce a mortgage security. The respondent joined the appellants as defendants in the mortgage suit on the allegation that they were transferees of the equity of redemption. He obtained the usual mortgage decree specifying the amount due on the mortgage and the costs of the suit. The decree directed that if this sum was not paid within the period of grace by the defendants to the plaintiff, the mortgaged property or a sufficient part thereof would be sold and the sale proceeds applied in satisfaction of the decree. Execution was taken out in due course and the decree was satisfied in part. But although the mortgaged properties had been exhausted, a considerable sum still remained due to the decree holder. The decree holder thereupon appl...
Mioram Bewah Vs. Mrijan Sardar and anr. and Fzal Sheikh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-1919
Reported in: 54Ind.Cas.169
Syed Shamsul Huda, J.1. In a proceeding under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code, there were three persons in the 1st party and twenty in the second. Of the twenty persons forming the Second party, all except No. 10 stated in their written statements that they had no concern with the land which belonged to Moiram Bewa. Second party No. 10 alleged that he had been cultivating about a bigha of land as bargadar under (sic). Apparently they took no further interest is the case, adduced no (sic) did not cross-examine the (sic) of the first party. On the day the written statements were filed, Moiram Bewa appeared and asked to be made a party, alleging that the land in respect of which there was the dispute had not been correctly described and that the boundaries given in the proceeding included land on which stood her dwelling house and part of which she cultivated. She said that the other side had been trying fraudulently to deprive her of her homestead, of which she with her sons was in ...
Mahamad Guran Choukidar (Chowngdar in Vakalatnama) Vs. Basarat Ali and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-1919
Reported in: 55Ind.Cas.645
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of khas possession of certain lands appertaining to Taraf No. 38 Alam Khan, which were sold for arrears of revenue and purchased by defendant No. 6 free from all incumbarances. The plaintiff alleges that the defendant No. 6 settled the Taraf with the plaintiff in sadar putni taluka right with the rights of an auction-purchaser and to receive the outstanding rent. The defendants Nos. 2 and 3, who alone contested the suit, amongst other things, contended that the lands in suit along with other lands, making a total of 5 kanis 4 gandas 3 karas, appertained to their mourasi ryoti jama, that they had acquired occupancy ryoti right in these lands, that in the survey of 1200 M.E. the lands in suit were recorded in the name of the predecessors of the defendants and that they appertained to 16 dags of the survey chitta of that year, and that inasmuch as the plaintiffs bad not obtained sadar putni taluka right in the entire land of the jama of the...
Ratnamala Dasi Vs. Kamakshya Nath Sen
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-19-1919
Reported in: 57Ind.Cas.9
1. We are invited in this Rule to consider the legality of an order dismissing an application for leave to sue in forma pauperis on the ground that it is barred by Order XXXIII, Rule 15, Civil Procedure Code. The petitioner is the wife of the opposite party. In 1916 she applied for leave to sue in forma pauperis to recover maintenance from her husband from April 1916 to the date of the institution of the suit. On that application, notice was issued to the opposite party and the application was refused on the ground mentioned in Rule 5, Clause (d), namely, that the allegations in the plaint did not show a cause of action. More than two years afterwards, she made the present application on the 5th August 1918 for leave to sue in forma pauperis to recover maintenance from her husband from April 1916 to the date of the institution of this suit. The Subordinate Judge has held that; the application is barred under Order XXXIII, Rule 15, and, in support of this view, has relied upon the decis...
Panchagopal Mookerjee and ors. Vs. Kali Das Mukherjee and Debi Das Muk ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-19-1919
Reported in: 54Ind.Cas.140
1. This appeal arises out of a suit to recover Rs. 1,563 on the basis of the Will of the late Babu Bijoy Kissen Mnkherjee of Uttarpara.2. Bijoy Kiasen died on the 17th Magh 1300 leaving seven sons and several daughters. Of his eons, the eldest, was Narendra Nath, the second Surendra Nath and the third Nagendra Nath. It is unnecessary to mention the names of the other sons. Narendra died on the 16th Pous 1312, and Nagendra died on the 20th Magh 1318. The appellants are the sons and grandsons of Narendra Nath, and the respondents are the sons of Nagendra Nath.3. Bijoy Kissen, by his Will dated the 16th Magh 1300, devised his movable and immovable properties to his sons and gave certain legacies to his daughters and other persons. By the first paragraph of his Will he gave to his eldest son Narendra Nath certain Mauzas within Lot Dwarbashini and certain other Mouzahs in the same loft were given to his second son Surendra Nath Certain other properties were also given to each of them, which...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »