Kolkata Court July 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.
Emperor Vs. Hari Das Mitra and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-05-1922
Reported in: AIR1923Cal108,73Ind.Cas.770
Walmsley, J.1. This case has been referred under Section 307, Criminal Procedure Code, by the Sessions Judge of Khulna.2. The story told by the prosecution is as follows:--Two young. Brahmin women Jibantara, the wife of Khetra Nath Bhattacharjee, and Probhabiiti, a widow, eloped with their lovers, hired a boat and after a week's travelling came to Bajra Bazar. The people of Bajna Bazar guessed what had happened, and thought it their duty to interfere, and they made arrangements for keeping the women, their lovers, and the women's ornaments until some relative could come and assume charge. The arrangement was, that the women and their lovers were taken to tie house of Sureudra Nath Mondal, the Panchayet the ornaments were deposited with a shop-keeper named Keshab Chandra Saha and a man named Bijay started to convey information to Jibantara's husband. All these facts are admitted, and in regard to the motive of the Bazar people, the learned Judge has rejected the Police theory that they ...
Monoranjan Bhattacharjya and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-04-1922
Reported in: AIR1932Cal818
Rankin, C.J.1. In this case five accused persons were tried before Commissioners appointed under the Bengal Criminal Law Amendment Act, upon a charge that on 14th March 1932, they committed a dacoity in Charmaguria Post Office and that in the course of committing that dacoity jointly a murder was committed by which one Tahir lost his life. All the accused were charged under Section 396, I.P.C., and the accused Monoranjan was also charged under Sections 302 and 326, I.P.C., and Section 19-F, Arms Act. The alleged ocurrence having; taken place in March the trial was held in the month of May following.2. It appears that the prosecution case is this: that very shortly after three o'clock in the afternoon five persons came into the Charmaguria Post Office. Two of them carried revolvers, one large and one small and another carrying a dagger. The men with revolvers pointed their weapons at the Post Master who had with him in the room some four or five assistants and one outsider named Anath C...
Kali Pada Bose and ors. Vs. Fani Bhusan Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-04-1922
Reported in: AIR1924Cal363,70Ind.Cas.173
1. In this appeal the questions that have been argued before us are, (1) that the decree of the lower Appellate Court is not in consonance with the judgment; (2) that the view taken by the lower Appellate Court that the plaintiffs have got a right of way over what has been described as the disputed pathway ghat and boat passage by prescription is wrong; (3) that, having regard to the finding of lower Appellate Court that the plaintiffs have not got any such right as has been claimed by them by grant, express or implied, the judgment of the lower Appellate Court cannot stand; and (4) that, having regard to the finding oil the lower Appellate Court that there is an alternative way, the pathway claimed by the plaintiffs on the ground of its beings an easement of necessity cannot stand.2. So far as the first point is concerned the material portion of the judgment of the lower Appellate Court runs in theses words : ' In point of fact, the disputed; pathway lies to the south and beyond the b...
Gouri Kumari Dasi Vs. Srimati Ramanimoyi Dasi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-04-1922
Reported in: AIR1923Cal30,70Ind.Cas.175
1. These are three appeals Nos. 1416, 1514 and 1515 of 1920, which are analogous, though a question arises, in the second and the third appeal as to whether an appeal lies, a question which does not arise in the first appeal.2. The first appeal arises out of a suit brought by the second wife of one Uma Charan Dey for recovery M of rent. An objection was taken by the defendants in that suit that the plaintiffs-appellants had no title to sue as the Shebait and that the title of Shebait was in the elder widow of Uma Chanm Dey, Uma Charaa Dey secured a deed of gift, in respect of his moveable and immoveable properties constituting the same Debutter in the year 1915 and making himself the first Shebait. That document provided for the devolution of the office of. Shebaitshipsas follows: 'After my demise my eldest wife Srimati Raman Kumari Dasi shall be the Shebait of the deities and after her my youngest wife Srimati Gouri Kumari Dasi shall be the Shebait. After the death of my both wives, i...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›