Kolkata Court March 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.
Barada Prasad Banerjee and anr. Vs. Bhupendra Nath Mukherjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal56,75Ind.Cas.55
B.B. Ghose, J.1. These two appeals arise out of two suits brought by the plaintiff against the defendants. The principal prayer of the plaintiff is this : 'That it may be declared that, save and except jarkaemi (ordinary) ticca jote right to terminate at will under the plaintiff in respect of the land and jama described in that schedule, the defendants have no right and power to make hollows and excavations and to manufacture bricks in the said land and jama and thus to change the features of the jote and to alter the character of the tenancy.' It is unnecessary to state any of the other prayers of which there is a large number, except that the plaintiff claims damages for certain excavations made by the defendants on the lands comprised in the tenancies. The Court of first instance dismissed the suits entirely. On appeal, by the plaintiff, the Subordinate Judge had-made a partial decree in his favour. With regard to Appeal No. 5, arising out of one of the suits, his order runs thus : ...
Radha Benode Mondal Vs. Nitai Chand Sant and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal185,76Ind.Cas.358
Panton, J.1. (No. 629). This Rule was obtained by a landlord who had brought to sale, in execution of a decree for rent the holding of the opposite party. The matter was dealt with in the Court below and has been dealt with in this Court on the footing that the holding in question was a non-transferable occupancy holding. The opposite party applied to make a deposit under Section 170, Sub-section (3) of the Bengal Tenancy Act, alleging that he was a mortgagee of the holding in question. The landlord objected to this deposit, but the Munsiff held that the opposite party had a right to deposit the money to prevent the sale. It is against this order that the present Rule is directed.2. There can be no doubt that there is a considerable conflict of judicial authority upon the question thus raised -a conflict that has been adverted to in several of the reported decisions. The Munsiff in arriving at his conclusion considered the cases of Nalini Behary Ray v. Fulmani Dasi [1912] 16 C.W.N. 421...
Jadu Nath Haldar and ors. Vs. Manindra Nath Chandra and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1923
Reported in: AIR1923Cal689,80Ind.Cas.323
B.B. Ghose, J.1. These two appeals are from orders made by the District Judge in insolvency proceedings arising out of applications made for adjudication as insolvents by two persons who are brothers. The appellants were the creditors of the two insolvents by two separate mortgage-bonds. The mortgage-bonds are dated 1893 and 1907 respectively. The mortgagors were the two insolvents and also two other brothers of those insolvents. It appears that one of the mortgage-bonds was sued on and a decree was obtained for Rs. 630. The amount alleged to have been due on the other bond from the mortgagors was Rs. 1,300 odd. Taken together, about Rs. 2,000 was due for those debts in May 1917. Then all the four brothers executed a deed of conveyance with regard to some of the mortgaged properties which included a house in Sonamukhi and some jote lands. The deed of sale is dated the 23rd May 1917 and the properties were sold for Rs. 2,000 to the appellant's father. Thereafter, two of the mortgagors p...
Ukiluddi Akan and anr. Vs. Asmat Ali Munshi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1923
Reported in: AIR1923Cal714,77Ind.Cas.29
Walmsley, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the plaintiffs and it is the result of a sale purporting to be held under the provisions of Act XI (B.C.) of 1859 and Act VII (B. C.) of 1868. The facts briefly stated are that a Howladar holding a Howla under Government Khasmekal regretted his bargain aid asked Government to manage the Howla during the unexpired term. In the Howla there is a Karsha and, after the Howla had been placed in the hands o the Government by the Howladar, the Karsha fell into arrears and, to realise the arrears, a sale was held under Act XI of 1859 at the instance of the Government. The plaintiffs sought to have the sale set aside by appealing to the commissioner but in vain. Consequently, they brought this suit.2. I am unable to follow the reasoning of the learned Munsif, adopted by the learned Subordinate Judge and repeated before us on behalf of the respondents that Section 3 of Regulation VII or 1822 has anything to do with the matter. The position was that the K...
Azizor Rahman Chaudhury Vs. Ahidennessa Chaudhurani and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-09-1923
Reported in: AIR1928Cal225
1. This is an appeal by the defendant against what may be described as the preliminary decree in a suit under Section 92, Civil P.C.2. The subject-matter of the litigation is a wakf which was created on the 24th September 1876 by a Mahomedan gentleman of the name of Mahomed Kabil Chaudhury, who died on the 3rd November 1876. He left two sons by two wives namely Man war Ali and Mazafar Ali who became joint mutwalis. Manwar Ali died in 1895 and thereupon Muzaffar Ali continued to act as the sole mutwalli till his death in 1906. Thereafter disputes broke out as to the office of mutwalli. Plaintiff 1, who is the daughter of a son of the founder, sued to secure the office of mutwalli. The claim was resisted by the defendant who is the son of a daughter of the founder. After a protracted trial the defendant was appointed mutwalli on the 27th August 1907 by the primary Court. This decree was affirmed by this Court on appeal on the 1st July 1910. Plaintiff 1, thus defeated, instituted a suit i...
Sundermull Vs. Ladhuram Kaluram
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-09-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal240
Page, J.1. This suit raises interesting and important questions with regard to the principles in accordance with which damages are to be measured against a tenant who holds over after the determination of his lease. For some 6 years prior to 1919 the defendant had been in occupation of a room in 13, Noormol Lohia Lane in Calcutta as a monthly tenant of the plaintiffs. He paid rent at the rate of Rs. 50 a month. On the 19th September 1919 notice to quit on behalf of the plaintiffs was given to him, the notice determining the tenancy as from the 7th November 1919. The defendant did not act upon that notice. He did not give vacant possession, and he remained in occupation of the premises. On the 11th November 1919, therefore, the plaintiffs brought a suit in the Calcutta Court of Small Causes for ejectment, and in answer to that suit the defendant alleged that he was in occupation under a lease for 3 years at a rental of Rs. 100 a month; and he also alleged that he had paid a salami for t...
Krishna Chandra Bhowmik Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-09-1923
Reported in: AIR1923Cal562,74Ind.Cas.542
1. The petitioner in this case is a Muktear practising in the Criminal and Revenue Courts in Pabna. He had been convicted of contempt of Court by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Pabna and under Section 228, Indian Penal Code sentenced to pay a fine of 50 rupees This conviction was upheld on appeal by the Sessions Judge of Pabna.2. This Rule was granted on the ground that the order passed by the Magistrate was illegal and without jurisdiction inasmuch as the petitioner was not called on to make a statement and no statement was, as a matter of fact, recorded as required by Section 481, Criminal Procedure Code. In dealing with this point the learned Sessious Judge remarked in his judgment that:The fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that a man must be heard before he is condemned has no application in such cases where special procedure has been provided by excess law. 3. With this expression of law we are in entire disagreement., The point has been considered by the Judicial ...
Chandrakisore Datta Majumdar Vs. Kumar Upendra Chandra Choudhury and o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-09-1923
Reported in: AIR1923Cal563,74Ind.Cas.612
1. The subject-matter of the litigation which has culminated in this appeal is one-fifth share in immoveable properties described in the schedule to the plaint, which formed part of the estate of one Kamal Narain Nandy Chowdhury, who died on the 26th December 1853. He left a widow, Parmeshwari Chowdhurani, who died on the 22nd September 1913. The present suit was instituted on the 20th September 1918 by Chandrakisore Datta Majumdar, the son of a sister of the original proprietor, who claimed title to the estate of his maternal uncle as the sole surviving reversionary heir. The claim was resisted by Upendra Chandra Choudhury and his wife on the basis of purchase at a sale held in execution of a mortgage decree. It appears that on the 28th July 1880 Parmeshwari, along with other members of the Nandy Chowdhury family, had executed a mortgage in favour of Harendra Lal Roy Chowdhury to secure a loan of Rs. 16,500 on the security of the properties inherited by her from her husband. The loan ...
Sundermull and ors. Vs. Ladhuram Kaluram
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-09-1923
Reported in: 83Ind.Cas.757
Page, J.1. This suit raises interesting and important questions with regard to the principles in accordance with which damages are to be measured against a tenant who holds over after the determination of his lease. For some 6 years prior to 10X9 the defendant had been in occupation of a room in 13, Nirmal Lohia Lane in Calcutta as a monthly tenant of the plaintiffs. He paid rent at the rate of Rs. 50 a month. On the 19th September 1919 notice on behalf of the plaintiffs, to quit was given to him, the notice determining the tenancy as from the 7th November 1919. The defendant did not act upon that notice. He did not give vacant possession and he remained in occupation of the premises. On the 11th November 1919, therefore, the plaintiffs brought a suit in the Calcutta Court of Small Causes for ejectment, and in answer to that suit the defendant alleged that he was in occupation under a lease for 3 years at a rental of Rs. 100 a month, and he also alleged that he had paid a salami for th...
Jagat Bandhu Saha and anr. Vs. Jagabandhu Saha Sardar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-08-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal192
1. We hold that this Rule must be made absolute on the second of the grounds on which it was issued, that is, that the Magistrate was functus officio and acted without jurisdiction in delivering the order under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code, which the petitioners wish to set aside. The Magistrate heard the case as Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Naraingunge. On the 18th November he handed over charge of his office as Sub-Divisional Officer on transfer to Barakpore.2. Once he had handed over charge he ceased to have any jurisdiction as Magistrate in the Dacca District, and therefore as was held by the Allahabad High Court in the case of Empress of India v. Anand Sarup (1881) 3 All. 563, the case which was followed by this Bench in Baishnab v. Amin Ali : AIR1924Cal55 , we must hold that the final order passed by him was without jurisdiction.3. We accordingly make this Rule absolute and set aside the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Naraingunge dated 20th November, 1922, decl...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »