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.
Durga Charan Maji Vs. Poresh Bewa
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-02-1923
Reported in: AIR1925Cal105,76Ind.Cas.336
B.B. Ghose, J.1. This appeal is by the defendant against the decision of the Subordinate Judge of Dacca reversing the decision of the Munsif. The question in controversy in this appeal is with regard to the effect of a document which runs in rather unusual term. The document is said to be a sale for a term. It is said that the executant, whose reversionary heiress the plaintiff is, owed a sum of money to the defendant's predecessor. The debt at the time of the deed amounted to Rs. 160 including principal and interest. Then the deed runs thus: 'Having no means to pay money in cash, I feel necessity to sell the jote lands of the chita and bari for a term and you have expressed your willingness to take the lands in lieu of the money from the year 1299 to the year 1348 for a period of fifty years and I sell you the lands for this period.' Then, it is stated: 'after the end of the period, you will return the land to me without any excuse. During the period the land will remain in your posse...
W. Rebeiro Vs. Elias E.M. Jacob
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-02-1923
Reported in: AIR1923Cal553,77Ind.Cas.623
N.R. Chatterjea, J.1. This Rule arises out of proceedings taken by the opposite party under the Calcutta Rent Act for fixing the standard rent of certain premises.2. It appears that the opposite party took a three years lease of the entire premises No. 40 Ripon Street at a rent of Rs. 150 in July 1919, and on the 4th August 1919 sublet, it, with the exception of three rooms facing Ripon Street at a monthly rent of Rs. 200 exclusive of taxes to the petitioner. Disputes having arisen between the partes, regarding the rent, the opposite party applied to the Rent Controller for fixed the standard rent of the premises held by the petitioner i.e., of the building with the exception of the roadside rooms. The Rent Controller fixed the standard rent of the premises at Rs. 148 per month exclusive of taxes. The opposite party thereupon moved the President of the Improvement Tribunal for revision of the order of the Rent Controller under Section 18 of the Rent Act, and the President held that the...
Hemendra Lal Singh Deo Vs. Fakir Chandra Datta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-02-1923
Reported in: 74Ind.Cas.929
1. The defendant is the appellant before us and the facts which have given rise to this appeal, shortly stated, are as follows. On the 17th April 1913 the plaintiffs obtained a preliminary decree in a mortgaged suit for Rs. 1,08,964-9-5 against the defendant in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Bankura. An appeal was carried against the said decree to this Court, being Appeal No. 39 of 1914, by the defendant, Raja Mahendra kal Singh Deo. This appeal came on for hearing before Mr. Justice Fletcher and Mr. Justice Shams-ul-Huda on the 10th January 1918 when a petition was put in on behalf of both parties to the effect that it had been agreed between the parties that the plaintiffs would get a decree for Rs. 70,000 inclusive of all costs and interest up to the said date, and that the said amount would be paid by the defendant, Raja Mahendra Ial Singh Deo, within two years there from with interest at the rate of Rs. 4-8-0 per cent, per annum till realization, and that in default of pay...
Muhammad Khandu Sarkar Vs. Sadak Ali Sheikh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-01-1923
Reported in: AIR1923Cal577,76Ind.Cas.963
1. This Rule is directed against an order passed by the Deputy Magistrate of Mymen singh under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code. Though it appears there was no absence of jurisdiction in the initiation of those proceedings, the Magistrate, when he found that there was actually no apprehension of the breach of the peace, was bound to cancel the initial order and stay all further proceedings under clause 5 of Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code. The apprehension of a breach of the peace is the first condition necessary to give the Magistrate jurisdiction under this Section, and if it is found there is no longer any such apprehension the Magistrate's jurisdiction ceases. We accordingly make this Rule absolute and set aside the order complained of under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›