Kolkata Court May 1922 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.
Shaikh Aziz Mandal Vs. Girish Chandra Chowdhri
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-10-1922
Reported in: AIR1923Cal320,68Ind.Cas.38
Lancelot Sandbrson, C.J.1. This Rule called upon the District Magistrate to show cause why the conviction and sentence of the petitioner should not be set aside on the first and fifth grounds in the petition.2. The first ground was that the learned Deputy Magistrate erred in not trying the case de novo and thereby failed to exercise a jurisdiction vested in him by law.3. The Magistrate who tried the case was Mr. A. P. Peters. The case had, in the first instance, been before Mr. Section C. Das Gupta, a Sub-Deputy Magistrate, and on the 1st April 1921 the complainant and four prosecution witnesses were examined. The case was then adjourned to 12th April 1921, for recording the accedes statement. On the l0th April 1921, Mr. Section C. Das Gupta recorded the statement of the accessed, charge was framed and three prosecution witnesses were cross-examined and the case was ad journal to the 3rd May 1941. Then, apparently, there were several adjournments, and on the 26th of Jane 1921 the Sub-D...
In Re: Abdul Samad
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-09-1922
Reported in: 70Ind.Cas.468
Greaves, J.1. This is an application by one Mahomed Omari for an order that a certain order made by the Registrar in Insolvency, on the 12th April 1922, on the application of Messrs. J.F. Kendrew and Co., may be set aside.2. The order of the 12th April was an order made by the Registrar in Insolvency under the provisions of Section 36 of the Insolvency Act directing Mahomed Omari's examination under that section. The order of the Registrar in Insolvency is attacked by the applicant on two grounds. First, it is said that, having regard to the provisions of Section 56, Messrs. J.F. Kendrew and Co., are not entitled to the order which has been made by the Registrar and, secondly, it is said that upon the merits no such order ought to have been made.3. Counsel for the applicant has directed my attention to the evidence upon which the Registrar made his order under Section 36, and on reading that evidence I am not prepared to disturb the order on that ground, but, so far as the first point ...
Parul Bala Debi Vs. Satish Chandra Bhattacharjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-09-1922
Reported in: AIR1923Cal456,75Ind.Cas.529
1. This is a Reference under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure made by the Sessions Judge of Burdwan. It relates to proceedings under Section 488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure instituted by one Parul Bala Debi against her husband, Satish Chandra Bhattacharjee. It appears that there were some proceedings of this nature which were infructuous and were struck off by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate on the 2nd April 1915; but the lady after that made another application on the 8th July 1915 which resulted in the Sub-Divisional Magistrate's making, on the 14th September 1915, an order in her favour directing the husband to pay her maintenance at the rate of Rs. 10 per month, The husband, it appears, is employed by the East Indian Railway Company. He was, at the time when the proceedings were instituted, in receipt of a monthly salary of Rs. 45 which has now risen to Rs. 76 a month. The lady was at the time residing elsewhere, but towards the end of the year 1918, she returned t...
Nava Kishore Das Vs. Madan Mohan Das Goswami
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-08-1922
Reported in: AIR1924Cal346a
Ghose, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the plaintiff and it arises out of a suit for specific performance of a contract for renewal of a lease executed by the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiff, dated the 7th Jeistha 1318 B.S. The lease was to run for seven years from the first of Baisakh preceding. There was a clause in the lease of which the translation made by the Courts below fairly gives the terms. It is as follows : 'If after the expiry of the term, I am desirous of keeping the land in my possession, you without settling the land with others should settle the land with me for the second time.' The lease then provided that, at the time of the second settlement, the lessor would be at liberty to enhance the rent without any objection on the part of the lessee. The plaintiff is an assignee from the original lessee, and his assignment is dated the 28th of Falgun 1323 B.S. On the 24th of Magh 1324 B.S., the plaintiff served a notice on the defendant expressing his desire fore r...
Amritanath Biswas and ors. Vs. Jogendra Chandra Bhattacharjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-08-1922
Reported in: AIR1924Cal369,69Ind.Cas.183
Ghose, J.1. The objections taken in this case on behalf of the appellants who are the defendants Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are (1) that the plaintiffs have made inconsistent claims in their plaint inasmuch as they claim maliki right and a right of easement at one and the same time and the suit is, therefore, defective; (2) that the suit is defective for want of necessary parties - the objection having been taken in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the written statement; (3) that the learned Subordinate Judge has made a decree in favour of the plaintiffs on the basis of a grant as regards a drain although no grant was pleaded in the plaint and (4) that the learned Subordinate Judge has used in evidence a decree against the defendant No. 1 which is not at all binding upon the other defendants. The suit was brought by the plaintiffs for establishment of their right of passage of water from their dwelling house along a drain for the purpose of discharging it into a khal. It was alleged by them that this was th...
Nava Kishore Das, and on His Death His Heir and Legal Representative, ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-08-1922
Reported in: 69Ind.Cas.600
Ghose, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the plaintiff and its arises out of a suit for specific performance of a contract for renewal of a lease executed by the predecessor in interest of the plaintiff,' dated the 7th Jaistha 1318 B. S. The lease was to tun for seven years from the 1st of Baisakh preceding. There was a clause in the lease of which the translation made by the Courts below fairly gives the terms. It is as follows: 'If after the expiry of the term, I am desirous of keeping the land in my possession, you without settling the land with others should settle the land with me for the second time,' The lease then provided that, at the time of the second settlement, the lessor would be at liberty to enhance the rent without any objection on the part of the lessee. The plaintiff in an assignee from the original lessee and his assignment is dated the 28th of Falgun 1323 B. S. On the 24th of Magh 1324 B. S., the plaintiff served a notice 'on the defendant expressing his desire for ...
Jagadishwar Sanyal Vs. Collector of Goalpara and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-05-1922
Reported in: AIR1925Cal197
Mookerjee, J.1. This is an appeal against an award made under the Land Acquisition Act in affirmance of an award made by the Collector. The land is held by a tenant under the Mechpara Wards Estate and the appellant is described as a sub-tenant under the tenant. His subtenancy was created on the 5th July, 1916. The document recites that the sub-tenant applied for land to construct a permanent house for himself with the result that 15 cottahs of land were granted to him at a rent of Rs. 15 to be paid from year to year. It was expressly stated that the landlord, his hairs and legal representatives would not be entitled to eject the sub-tenant from his land during the time that he might have his house thereon. It was finally added that the sub-tenant would not be entitled to make a gift of, to sell or in any way to transfer the land to any one without the permission of his immediate landlord.2. A portion of the land has been acquired under the Land Acquisition Act and an award has been mad...
Phanindra Chandra Vs. Nagendra Chandra and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-04-1922
Reported in: AIR1925Cal75
Mookerjee, J.1. F.A. 51 of 1921. This appeal is directed against the grant of probate of a Will alleged to have been executed by one Pannamoni Dassi on the 18th December, 1918 and registered on the 12th February, 1919. The lady died on the 18th August, 1919. An application was made on the 6th February, 1920 for probate of the Will by two of her sons (who are named as executors) in the Court of the Subordinate Judge and district delegate. On the 20th March, 1920 a petition of objection supported by an affidavit was filed by another son of the testatrix, who is now the appellant before us. Thereupon the case was treated as contentious and was transferred to the District Judge. On the 7th May, 1920 an order was recorded to the effect that the application should be treated as a contentious probate case. A written statement was filed by the objector on the 8th June, 1920, On the 21st June, 1920 the pleaders of both sides were heard and the following issues were framed: (A) 'Was the will dul...
Asutosh Chakrabarty and ors. Vs. Dwarikanath Mata and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-04-1922
Reported in: 70Ind.Cas.119
1. It appears that an island formed in the Dhaleswari river, in the District of Khulna, to which the provisions of Bengal Act IV of 1868 would seem to have been applicable. Possession of the island was taken by the Government, and in the year 1903 the island was settled with the plaintiffs for a period of five years expiring on the 31st March 1907, as Chur Sonaknr, bearing Touzi No. 1020. This temporary settlement was continued for another period of five years ending on the 31st March 1912. The Revenue Authorities then decided that there should be, a fresh assessment of revenue. The estate was, therefore, re-settled for one year only with the plaintiffs, and proceedings were taken under Regulation VII of 1822 to re-assess the revenue. The result was, that the estate was settled with the plaintiffs for a term of five years commencing on the 1st April 1913 at an annual revenue of Rs. 674, the previous revenue having been Rs. 178.2. In 1917 the plaintiffs instituted four suits for rent wh...
Phanindra Chandra Sett Vs. Nagendra Chandra Sett and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-04-1922
Reported in: 84Ind.Cas.65
F.A. No. 51 of 19211. This appeal is directed against the grant of Probate of a Will alleged to have been executed by one Pannamoni Dassi on the 18th December 1918 and. registered on the 12th February 1919. The lady died on the 18th August 1919. An application was made on the 6th February 1920 for Probate of the Will by two of her sons (who are named as executors) in the Court of the Subordinate Judge and District Delegate. On the 20th March 1920 a petition of objection supported by an affidavit was filed by another son of the testatrix, who is now the appellant before us. Thereupon the case was treated as contentious and was transferred to the District Judge. On the 7th May, 1920, an order was recorded to the effect that the application should be treated as a contentious probate case. A written, statement was filed by the objector on the 8th June 1920. On the 21st June 1920 the Pleaders of both sides were heard and the following issues were framed: (A) 'Was the Will duly and legally e...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »