Kolkata Court January 1923 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.
Satish Chandra Addya Vs. Firm Raj NaraIn Pakhira and Rasik Lal Pakhira ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-1923
Reported in: 72Ind.Cas.60
1. These two appeals arise out of proceedings under the Provincial Insolvency Act.2. An application was made by one of the creditors for declaring the debtors (who are four out of five members of a firm, the fifth being a minor) insolvent. Some of the other creditors opposed the application on various grounds. The learned, District Judge dismissed the application on several grounds. After the application had teen disposed of, four of the debtors made an application for being declared insolvents. This also was rejected by the Court below on the ground, among others, that they had not proved their inability to pay their debts. These two appeals are against these two orders. We propose to deal first of all with Miscellaneous Appeal No. 378 of 1922 which deals with applications of the four debtors to be declared insolvents.3. It appears that one of the debtors, Rasik Lal, was examined and he stated that the debts amounted to over Rs. 1,06,600 and that they were unable to pay their debts; a...
Surendra Nath Some and ors. Vs. Raghunath Dutt and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-1923
Reported in: AIR1923Cal558,76Ind.Cas.1052
1. The judgment of the lower Appellate Court in this case runs as follows 'Heard Vikil. The appeal is summarily dismissed.' Although we have beard a brave and courageous argument in support of this judgment, we have no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the terms of the judgment are not in accordance with the interpretation which has been placed on Order XLI, Rule 11, Civil Procedure Code, by this Court, (See in this connection the cases of Rami Deka v. Brojo Nath Saikia 25 C. 97 : 1 C.W.N. 692 : 13 Ind. Dec. (N.S.) 66, Rahhal Chunder Tewari v. Satindra Deb Rai 5 C.L.J. 348, and the judgment of Mr. Justice Richardson in the case of Pachi Dasi v. Bala Das 2 Ind. Cas. 405 : 13 C.W.N. 1031. As has been pointed out in these cases the dismissal of an appeal under Order XLI, Rule 11, Civil. Procedure Code by a Court whose decision may be the subject of an appeal does not relieve the Court from the necessity of writing a judgment which however need not be a long one. But the judgment...
East Indian Railway Company Vs. Kushabram Gopiram
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-1923
Reported in: AIR1925Cal518
Suhrawardy, J.1. In this case the claim was for damages caused to 24 bags of flour consigned by the opposite party through the Railway Company. There is no case of total loss of any complete consignment or a complete package. The consignment was covered by a Risk Note known as Risk Note B, under which the company is liable only for the loss of a complete consignment or of one or more complete packages. The plaintiff's case was that they got the bags, but that they were damaged by being exposed to rain in transit. This point came up for decision before this Court on many occasions and it was decided that, having regard to the Risk Note B the company is liable only for the loss of a complete consignment or of one or more complete packages. There being no such loss in this case the decree passed by the Small Cause Court Judge must be held to be wrong. The rule is, therefore, made absolute, the order passed by the Small Cause Court Judge, set aside and the plaintiff's suit dismissed with c...
Nripendra Nath Bhowmik and ors. Vs. Basanta Kumar Lahiri
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-1923
Reported in: AIR1925Cal1195
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for establishment of the right of the plaintiffs to and recovery of possession of two taluks and five jotes as reversionary heirs of two ladies, Bhabani and Padmamani. The defendants are the lessees under the widows, who are now dead.2. It appears that the plaintiffs' father Prasanna executed a mortgage in respect of the taluks and the jotes, in favour of one Raj Kumar, the defendants' father, on the 12th November 1880, evidently treating the properties as belonging to him alone. Three ladies of the family (including the two named above) however got their names registered, each in respect of her 4 annas share as heirs by right of succession to the last five owners respectively in 1882. In 1883 Raj Kumar, the mortgagee, obtained a lease from the three ladies in respect of 12 annas share in the name of his grandson Basanta. In 1891 Raj Kumar brought a suit for foreclosure upon the mortgage, which resulted in a compromise. It was agreed that there would...
Nawab Khajeh Habibullah and ors. Vs. Gola Asmoter Khatun and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-1923
Reported in: 74Ind.Cas.575
1. This appeal has arisen tinder rather peculiar circumstances. The Stilt out of which this appeal has arisen was brought by the plaintiffs for recovery of possession of two plots of land after establishment of title thereto. In the Court of first instance, the suit was decreed in the following mariner. The plaintiff's title was declared to the Rian of plot No. 1 and the entirety of plot No. 2 as against defendants, No. 1. I to, 19 and 23 to 26 after contest arid ex parte as; against the remaining defendants. In the Court of Appeal below, the following order 'was passed: 'The suit be decreed in part; the title of plaintiffs Nos. 2 to 7 be declared to I Rani of plot No. 1 and plot No. 2 of the. plaint; and plaintiffs Nos. 2 to 7 do remain in possession of the same. So far as plaintiff No. 1 is concerned the suit is dismissed with costs. The parties (except plaintiff No. 1) do get costs in the lower Court in proportion to their success. But all this is dependent upon plaintiffs Nos. 2 to...
Rampado Sirkar and ors. Vs. Atore Dome
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-1923
Reported in: 84Ind.Cas.743
1. This is an appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent from the judgment of Mr. Justice Newbould in a suit for ejectment.2. The Trial Court decreed the claim. That judgment was reversed on appeal by the District Judge and the decision of the District Judge has been affirmed by Mr. Justice Newbould. The substantial question in controversy is, whether the status of the defendant is to be determined by reference to the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act or the Bengal Tenancy Act. Upon this matter, the Courts below were divided in opinion while the Court of first instance holds that the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act were applicable, the District Judge has held that the provisions of the Bengal Tenancy Act govern the case. The answer to the question depends upon the previous history of the land in suit.3. It is not disputed that the tenancy of one Patal Sheik, who held an area of 10 cottahs under the superior landlords, was purchased by the father of the plaintiffs....
Hari Satya Bishnu and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-1923
Reported in: 73Ind.Cas.934
Newbould, J.1. The two petitioners have been committed for trial on the charge of conspiring to commit the offence of cheating punishable under Section 120 B and Section 420, Indian Penal Code. The Rule is to show cause why that commitment should not be quashed on the ground that the offence of conspiracy having already been taken cognizance of by Mr. B.N. Mukherjee, Deputy Magistrate, no other Magistrate had jurisdiction to take cognizance of it again so long as Mr. B.N. Mukherjee was in seisin of the case, therefore, the proceedings before the learned District Magistrate have been wholly ultra vires and are fit to be set aside.2. It appears that on three separate Police reports Mr. B. N. Mukherjee took action against the petitioners and others in respect of this conspiracy and required them to give bail to answer the charge. The cages before Mr. B.N. Mukherjee remained pending and no evidence was taken up to the 28th June. On the 28th June a formal complaint was laid before the Distr...
Haripada Bandopadya Vs. Equitable Coal Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-11-1923
Reported in: AIR1923Cal335,76Ind.Cas.413
1. The question which, has been the subject of discussion In this appeal is, whether the grantee of mineral rights in a certain mouza is entitled by implication to such things as are strictly and reasonably necessary for the convenient working of the mines and, if that be so, whether on the facts of this particular case the Equitable Coal Company who were the grantees of the mining rights in the village Jamuria were entitled to construct a tramway line over the land which is the subject-matter of the suit for the purposes indicated above and whether in addition thereto, they were en tilled to erect sheds for the accomodation of the coolies working in the mines for the convenient working of the mines. The facts, so far as they bear on the question referred to above, have been set out in the judgment of the lower Appellate Court and we think it is unnecessary to repeat them; shortly stated, it appears that on the 22nd July 1871 the defendant Company were granted a dur-patni of the villag...
Kali Singh and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-10-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal53
1. This is an appeal by two persons who have been convicted of various offences in connection with a fraudulent suit brought in the Munsif's Court. The main facts found are that the appellant Kali Singh, filed a suit against one Pasindi Roy of Kanaila, in the United Provinces, in the Court of the Munsif of Rampurhat, in the district of Birbhum, in this province. That suit was based on a hand-note which has been found to have been a forgery, and to have been forged by the second accused, Deb Nath Roy. Kali Singh was charged with having fraudulently used as genuine a forged document purporting to be a valuable security, punishable under Section 471 of the Penal Code, and also with having been a member of a criminal conspiracy for the purpose of fraudulently and dishonestly making a false claim punishable under Section 209 read with Section 120-B of the Penal Code. Deb Nath was charged with forging a valuable security punishable under Section 467 of the Penal Code, with abetment of the of...
Jinnat Ali and ors. Vs. Kailas Chandra Chowdhury and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-10-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal847
Mookerjee, J.1. This is an appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent from the judgment of Mr. Justice Newbould in a suit for recovery of possession of land upon establishment of title.2. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court and that decision has been successively affirmed in the District Court and in this Court. The disputed land belonged originally to the father of the plaintiffs and was sold in execution of a mortgage-decree when it was purchased by the defendants who were strangers to the proceeding. The only question is whether the sale so held was a nullity. The case for the plaintiffs is that after the decree had been obtained against their father, their father died. Execution was thereupon taken out against their mother as also against themselves represented to be under the guardianship of their mother. They urge that this was not a proper representation for the purpose of the execution proceedings and that consequently the sale has not affected their right, title and in...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »