Kolkata Court July 1921 Judgments
Kali Dassi Vs. Kanai Lal De and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-25-1921
Reported in: AIR1921Cal486,64Ind.Cas.709
1. This is a Rule calling upon the opposite party as well as upon the Controller of Rents, Calcutta, to show cause why the order dismissing an application under Section 15 of the Calcutta Rent Act (for fixing the standard rent), on the ground that the petitioner had no locus standi to make the application, should not be set aside.2. The order of the Rent Controller was as follows:--'From the evidence on the record it appears evident that the applicant is a woman of the town and that the sub tenants to whom she has sub let the different rooms comprised in the premises are also women of the town. The appellant has, therefore, no locus standi to make this application and I dismiss it.'3. It is unnecessary to consider the contention that the rent of a house let out to a prostitute cannot be standardised under the Rent Act, because the contract of tenancy is void, as in the present case the opposite parties, who are the landlords, did not set up the question of invalidity of the tenancy. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Chowdhury Ajodhya Nath Pahary Vs. Chowdhury Srinath Chandra Pahary
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-25-1921
Reported in: AIR1921Cal472,68Ind.Cas.207
1. This is an appeal by the decree-holder against an order of dismissal made on an application for execution of a decree. The decree was made by consent of parties on the 25th June 1915. The first application for execution was made on the 26th June 1916. Thereupon a writ of attachment was issued. The writ was returned un(sic)erved and on the 4th August 1916 the Court directed a fresh attachment to issue in the following terms: 'The decree-holder is to file process and process-fees within five days.' This order was carried out. But on the very next day, the judgment-debtor filed, a petition under Order XXI, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil procedure, to the effect that the decree had been satisfied out of Court and, consequently, no execution could issue on the basis thereof. This objection was numbered as a separate case. The two case a were adjourned from time to time and on the 9th December 1916 the objection case as wall as the execution case came up for consideration. The objector appli...
Tag this Judgment!Sewdutrai Narsaria Vs. Tata Sons Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-23-1921
Reported in: AIR1921Cal576,77Ind.Cas.769
Greaves, J.1. This is an application on behalf of Sewdutrai Narsaria to set aside an award of an umpire, dated the nth June 1921, warding that Messrs. Sewdutrai Narsaria should pay to Messrs. Tata Sons a sum of Rs. 16,320 together with interest at 8 per cent. per annum from the 13th November 1920 until date of payment.2. Various grounds are set out in the notice of motion but tie following only were urged before me, namely, (1) that the umpire was guilty of misconduct in acting has he did and in refusing to hear evidence and in refusing to state a case for the opinion of the Count, (2) in awarding interest on damages.3. So far as (1) is concerned, the real question turns on whether the umpire was bound at the request of Sewdutrai Narsaria to state a case for the opinion of the Court on the construction of Clause 3 of the contract between the parties. If he was not so bound then it was open to him to construe the clause for himself and in the view he took of the clause the evidence whic...
Tag this Judgment!Taramoni Chaudhurani Vs. Gopal Das Chaudhuri
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1921
Reported in: 65Ind.Cas.182
1. The question in dispute is as to the site of the boundary between the Muzahs Gurkanda and Chhitpara, which be long to the plaintiff, and Lalitabari, which belongs to the defendant, purchased by him in 1905 (1312). The value of the land in question it not much, but the parties who are both rich Zemindars have been quarreling for years past and it is said that the tarrying on of a certain hat is indirectly concerned in the decision. The case has lasted some ten days, the parties being indisposed to settle the matter. The Subordinate Judge has held that the river which forms a boundary between the properties of the two parties has been incorrectly shown in the revenue survey map, at least so far as it passes between the Mouzahs Garkanda and Chhitpara on the one hand and Lalitabari on the Other. A long argument has been addressed to as on the various maps and the other aspects of the case. Whatever value may be attached to some of the points made by the appellant, it must be remembered ...
Tag this Judgment!Monmotha Paul Chaudhury and ors. Vs. Mohendra Nath Bose and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1921
Reported in: AIR1922Cal284,65Ind.Cas.469
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for enhancement of rent, and for additional rent for additional area comprised in a jote.2. The jote consisted originally of about 3,320 bighas of land, and was held by one Mr. Poulson at a rent of Rs. 63-13-5, The defendants' father was the landlord in respect of the jote a 5-annas share in patni right and 11-annas shares as a proprietor. He brought a suit for enhancement of rent of the jote in 1867 which went up to the Privy Council, and the jama was enhanced to Rs. 1,805-10-10 the lands of the jote being found to be 3,340 bighas, During the pendency of that litigation, one Khantokali Dasi obtained a decree against the defendants in respect of the 5-annas patni right of the village in which the lands are situate. She let out the 5-annas share to the plaintiffs in 1876. The defendants then, purchased the entire tenancy from the heirs of Mr. Poulson. The defendants thus had a 11-annas share of the landlord's interest and the entire interest of the te...
Tag this Judgment!The Secretary of State for India in Council Vs. Moulvi Wazed Ali Khan ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1921
Reported in: AIR1921Cal687,65Ind.Cas.866
Asutosh Mookerjee, J.1. The subject matter of the litigations which have led up to the present appeals is an extensive treat of alluvial land and covers an area of about sis thousand bighas. The plaintiffs in the two suits summoned below claim title to different shares in this tract of land. It is not necessary for our present purpose to set out in detail the shares claimed by these persons respectively; it is sufficient to state that the plaintiffs taken together as a body claim to be entitled to the disputed lands as reformation in situ of the permanently settled estates Nos. 26, 31 and 774 461 of the Mymensing Collectorate. The two last named estates have been transferred to the district of Patna and bear Nos. 343 and 907 on the Revenue Rolls of the Collectorate of that district. These three estates comprised lands in the two districts, and the subject-matters of the two suits are situated in the Patna district. The case for the plaintiffs in both the suits is, that these three esta...
Tag this Judgment!Mohendra Nath Nanda and ors. Vs. Baidya Nath Tripathi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1921
Reported in: AIR1922Cal95,70Ind.Cas.127
Lancelot Sanderson, C.J.1. This is a Rule which was granted by my learned brothers, Mr. Justice Chatterjee and Mr. Justice Suhrawardy, calling upon the opposite party to show cause why the order complained of should not be set aside. The order complained of is an order of the learned Munsif sitting at Contai, and the matter arose in this way. The petitioners in this Court, at whose instance the Rule was granted, are the landlords.2. They obtained a decree against a purda-nashin widow for an ears of rent, and an execution case was instituted for the purpose of putting the property up to sale. The opposite parties are admittedly the reversioners, and they applied to the learned Munsif to be allowed to deposit the decretal amount under Section 170, Sub-section (3) of the Bengal Tenancy Act. The learned Munsit allowed the application and there was an appeal to the learned District Judge who held that the appeal did not he. The learned Vakil, who supported this Rule, agreed that there was n...
Tag this Judgment!Saday Chandra Jana Vs. Poresh Nath Ghose
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1921
Reported in: 64Ind.Cas.571
1. This is appeal by the judgment-debtor against an order for execution of a decree. The decree was made by this Court on the 2nd December 1912 in an appeal in a rent suit. Within three years of the date of the decree, an application for execution was made. Within three years from the date of the first application for execution a second application for execution was made on the 22nd May 1917. The Court returned this application for amendment on three grounds, namely, first, that the date of the disposal of the previous execution case had not been correctly stated; secondly that the calculation of the dues as stated in the eighth column of the tabular statement was incorrect; and thirdly, that the tenth column had not been duly filled up The application was not amended and re-filed within the time allowed. But a third application was presented on the 12th December 1919 The question in controversy is whether this application is or is not barred by limitation. The Courts below have concur...
Tag this Judgment!Panchu Gopal Chattopadhya and anr. Vs. Srimati Matangini Debi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1921
Reported in: AIR1921Cal560,64Ind.Cas.581
1. This is an appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent from the judgment of Mr. Justice Huda in a suit instituted for the removal of an obstruction to access of light and air in a house claimed by the plaintiff as her own property. The suit was decreed by the Trial Court. On appeal, the Subordinate Judge dismissed the suit, on the ground that the plaintiff was benamdar of her husband and could not consequently maintain a suit for enforcement of right of user of light and air. On appeal Mr. Justice Huda has set aside that decision and has remanded the case for consideration on the merits. The judgment of Mr. Justice Huda is based on the ground that the plaintiff had a right of residence in the house as the widow of the late owner and that that alone was sufficient to entitle her to maintain the suit. On behalf of the appellant it has been argued that this aspect of the case was propounded for the first time in this Court and should not have been considered. We need not examine wheth...
Tag this Judgment!Sanaton Sant and anr. Vs. Dinabandhu Giri and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1921
Reported in: 64Ind.Cas.622
1. This is an appeal by the judgment-debtors against an order for execution of a mortgage-decree and for sale of the properties covered thereby. The mortgage suit, which was instituted on the 23rd March 1910, resulted in a preliminary decree on the 19th June 1910 under Order XXXIV, Rule 4, Civil Procedure Code. On the 4th June 1913 an application was made for a final decree. On the 10th July 1913, an order was recorded in the following terms : Service of notice on the defendants proved. No objection is raised. The period of redemption fixed in the decree has expired. No payment appears to have been made. Ordered that the decree be made absolute.' On the basis of this order, a final decree was drawn up under Order XXXIV, Rule 5, Civil Procedure Code. On the 18th August 1916 the decree holders put in a petition for amendment of the final decree. Thereupon the following order was recorded on the 26th August 1916 : 'It appears that the clerk who wrote the final decree in this suit did not ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »