Kolkata Court December 1921 Judgments
Mohar Ali Sarkar Vs. MafizuddIn Sarkar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-21-1921
Reported in: 65Ind.Cas.699
1. The main ground urged in these appeals is that certain documents were improperly admitted in evidence.2. Two of the documents were copies of judgments in a previous suit for ejectment brought by the respondent against one Jait-un-nissa Bibi, in which he obtained a decree. It is contended by the learned Pleader for the appellant that they were not admissible in evidence as the appellant was no party to that suit, and that the reasons contained in the judgment could not be used against him.3. But the learned Subordinate Judge on appeal has not considered the reasons for the judgment and has merely referred to the fast that there was a suit in which the title of the present defendant was set up by Jait-un-nissa Bibi and that the suit was decreed. For this purpose the judgments were admissible in evidence.4. The criminal case has been referred to as showing that the defendant has all along bean fighting with Alimuddin and on big death with his son, the present plaintiff, but has been mo...
Tag this Judgment!Panchanan Poddar and anr. Vs. Khitish Chandra Alias Bhola Saha and ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-21-1921
Reported in: 67Ind.Cas.298
1. One Mohim Chandra Poddar and the plaintiffs were partners in a business. On accounts being adjusted in 1312 Mohim Chandra Poddar executed a hatchita in favour of the plaintiffs on the 2ad of Baisakh 1312 for Rs. 227-11-9. This hatchita was renewed on the 7th Magh 1315 by another hatchita in which this amount is mentioned as due. It was subsequently renewed several times in 1318, 1321 and, lastly, on the 25th Pous 1324. The plaintiffs brought this suit being his cause of action on the hatchita executed in 1324.2. The learned Subordinate Judge of Pabna, exercising Small Cause Court Jurisdiction, dismissed the plaintiffs' suit on the ground that on the 7th Magh 1315 when the hatchita was renewed for the first time the debt had already become time-barred and so it could not operate as an acknowledgment under Section 19 of the Limitation Act.3. It is argued in this Rule, which has been obtained by the plaintiffs, that the hatchita of the 7th Magh 1315 ought to be treated as a contract wi...
Tag this Judgment!Baul Chandra Addya Vs. Sheikh Abdul Matleb
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-20-1921
Reported in: 67Ind.Cas.851
1. This Rule is directed against a decree of the Court of Small Causes at 'Sealdah. It is urged that the judgment passed by the learned Small Cause Court Judge is not in accordance with law.2. The learned Judge has specified the points for decision and has entered his findings seriatim under each of the issues mentioned by him. We thick he has complied with the provisions of Order XX, Rule 4, Clause 1.3. The next point urged is with regard to the defendant not having been given a sufficient opportunity of calling a handwriting expert. There was an application for review before the learned Judge and the reason he has given in his judgment on that application affords a complete answer to this objection.4. It is also argued that the present suit being one for account is not cognizable by the Small Cause Court. It appears from the judgment of the learned Judge that the plaintiff's case was that the defendant acknowledged the plaintiffs dues to be Rs. 522-1-6 for which the suit was brought....
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Gani and ors. Vs. Nabendra Kishore Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-19-1921
Reported in: 65Ind.Cas.592
1. The property in suit which appertains to Taluk; Durga Ram Mazumdar was sold in execution of a decree for rent obtained by the landlord, the Maharaja of Tipperah, against, amongst others, Minnatali, defendant No. 1, as representing his father Kamarali who had a share in the taluk. Kamarali had executed a wakfnamah in 1800 B.S. by which he appointed his two sons Minnatali and Abdul Gani, the second defendant, as Mutwallis. The plaintiffs as purchasers in the said execution sale brought this suit for recovery of possession of the share of the taluk which was owned by Kamarali against all the heirs of Kamarali. Defendant No. 2 contended that the rent decree obtained by the Maharaja of Tipperah and the sale consequent upon it did not affect the wakf estate. On these pleadings two issues were raised: (1) Had the landlord notice of the wakfnama? 63 Ind Cas. 706 : 26 C.W.N. 1 38 Did defendant No. 1 represent the defendants or mutwallis in the landlord's sherista? Both these issues were foun...
Tag this Judgment!Nafar Chandra Pal Chowdhury Vs. Bhusi Molla
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-19-1921
Reported in: 65Ind.Cas.581
1. The suit giving rise to this appeal was a suit for rent brought by the plaintiff appellant claiming rent at the rate of Rs. 8-11-12 1/2 gundas. The defendant alleged that the rent was Rs. 6-7 a year. It has been proved that the plaintiff got two rent-decrees one for the rent for 1313 to 1316 and the other for the period 1317 to 1320 at the rate of rent, claimed by him. These decrees were ex parte decrees but they were put into execution and in both cases the money was paid out of Court. The Court of first instance treated these decrees is evidence in the case but gave effect to the defendant's contention that the plaintiff was not competent to claim the rent at the rate alleged by him in contravention of the provisions of Section 29 of the Bengal Tenancy Act. It was found from the evidence on the record that the rent of the holding was Rs. 6-7 a year. On appeal the learned District Judge raised a presumption in favour of the plaintiff as to the rate of rent under Section 51 of the B...
Tag this Judgment!Nagendranath Paud Vs. Srimati Sorat Kamini Dast, and on Her Death Her ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-19-1921
Reported in: 66Ind.Cas.879
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of rents realised by the defendant from certain tenants in respect of certain lands purchased by the plaintiff at a sale held in execution of a mortgage-decree obtained by two persons, Digambar Pal and Gopinath Daripa.2. It appears that subsequent to the decree obtained by the mortgagee, the mortgagor granted a usufruetuary mortgage in favour of the defendant. The defendant' entered into possession of the property under it and realised rent from certain tenants of the property. The plaintiff, after his purchase at the sale held in execution of the mortgage-decree, obtained possession of the property through the 'Court from the defendant, and then brought the suit out of which this appeal arises for recovery of monies realised by the defendant from the tenants for certain kists of Jeyst and Bhadra 1320, Fasli.3. It is found that the defendant's usufruetuary mortgage was pendente lite and, as such, invalid as against the plaintiff. The pla...
Tag this Judgment!Hari Charan Karanjai Vs. Bahar Sheikh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-19-1921
Reported in: 67Ind.Cas.252
1. The facts of this Rule are as follows: The plaintiff brought a suit for recovery of Rs. 145 alleged to be due on two unregistered bonds. The Court of first instance decreed the suit. On appeal the learned Subordinate Judge dismissed the suit holding that certain account-books which were produced by the plaintiff were not reliable.2. The plaintiff has now moved this Court on the ground that the Judge in the lower Appellate Court acted with material irregularity in the exercise of his jurisdiction in refusing to take in evidence the plaintiff's pucca account-books to clear a misapprehension which was occasioned for the first time during the hearing of the appeal which the plaintiff had no previous opportunity of explaining.3. The fasts would appear to be these: the appeal was heard on the 20th May and judgment was reserved. Then on the 23rd May the respondent apparently for the first time asked to put in certain account-books which, he alleged, would clear up the discrepancies in the ...
Tag this Judgment!Saibesh Chandra Sarkar Vs. Moharajadhiraj Sir Bejoy Chand Mohatap Baha ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-16-1921
Reported in: 65Ind.Cas.711
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for refund of money which had been allowed as compensation for certain lands acquired under the Land Acquisition Act and withdrawn by the defendant.2. It appears that the lands in question were acquired for a Railway. The plaintiff (the Zemindar) and the defendant, (the putnidar) were served with notices under Section 9 of the Land Acquisition Act. The Collector apportioned the compensation half and half between the Zemindar and the putnidar. Neither party applied for any reference under Section 18 of the Act and the putnidar withdrew the amount awarded to him by the Collector. The Zemindar thereupon brought the suit, out of which this appeal arises, for recovery of the amount which had been withdrawn by the defendant, on the ground that under the putni kabuliyat, the putnidar was not entitled to any portion of the compensation money. The defence inter alia was that the plaintiff ought to have applied for reference under Section 18 of the Act and tha...
Tag this Judgment!Hriday Nath Mondal and anr. Vs. Tala Bewa and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-15-1921
Reported in: 65Ind.Cas.706
1. In the suit out of which this appeal has arisen the plaintiffs sued to recover khas possession on declaration of their title to a certain holding. Their case was that the defendants were their under-raiyats and they had served notice on them under Section 49 of the Bengal Tenancy Act. The learned Munsif found that the interest of the plaintiffs was that of occupancy raiyats and the interest of the defendants was that of under raiyats and that they were liable to ejectment on notice. On appeal to the District Judge he first allowed the appeal in the absence of the respondents. A petition of review was allowed and the appeal re-heard and the District Judge has now dismissed the appeal.2. The point so far as we understand it which is now raised by the learned Vakil for the appellants is that at the time when their present landlords purchased the holding the status of the landlords was that of a raiyat at fixed rate and he would argue that it is immaterial if, for some reason or other, ...
Tag this Judgment!Sreemutty Sashimukhi Dasi Vs. Sreemuty Monmohini Dasi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-15-1921
Reported in: 67Ind.Cas.87
1. Upon the findings arrived at, we think that the attestation of the document, even taking it as a deed of gift, has been sufficiently proved.2. The attesting witness, who was tailed, stated that he put his name as a witness after the execution of the document; in other words, that he was not an attesting witness. But the District Judge has found upon the evidence that the document was executed in the presence of that witness. The evidence, therefore, of the other witness was relied upon by the learned District Judge not for the purpose of proving execution of the document but for proving that the attesting witness who said that he had not seen the execution did as a matter of fact see it and was an attesting witness. The learned Judge also refers to the evidence of Hem Chandra, another attesting witness, examined at an earlier stage of the suit, namely, when the application for leave to use as a pauper was made.3. We think, having regard to the findings arrived at, that the document ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »