Kolkata Court April 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.
Ramkamal Banik Saha Vs. Syam Sundar Banik Saha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal411
Mookerjee, J.1. This appeal is directed against a decree of dismissal made in a suit for construction of a will. One Krishna Prosad Saha Banik, the father of the plaintiff s and the first defendant made a testamentary disposition of his properties on the 30th April, 1897. Probate was taken by the executors on the 13th September, 1897. The present suit was instituted on the 15th August, 1919, for construction of the will and for a declaration that the testator had died intestate with regard to all his properties, except what he had specifically bequeathed to his widow, and that the plaintiffs had thereupon become entitled to two-thirds share of the estate left by their father by right of inheritance. The suit was defended on a variety of grounds which need not be enumerated for our present purpose. It is sufficient to state that the suit has been dismissed as barred by limitation. The Subordinate Judge has held that right to sue for declaration that the father of the plaintiffs had died...
Sasi Kanta Acharyya Bahadur Vs. Abdur Rahman Sarkar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-11-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal158
Mookerjee, J.1. This is an appeal by the landlord in an apportionment case under the Land Acquisition Act. The Collector valued the land and made an award in favour of the landlord alone on the ground that under the contract of the tenancy, the landlord alone was entitled to the entire compensation. The landlord was satisfied with the amount which was thus awarded to him. The tenant however obtained an order of reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act to the Land Acquisition Judge who has held that apart from what the landlord has received the tenant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 357-8-0. The landlord now contends that under the terms of the contract between him and his tenant he is entitled to this additional sum. It is not necessary to consider the legal effect of the terms of the contract between the parties; for it is plain that as the landlord was satisfied with the sum which was awarded to him by the Collector and never asked for a reference under Section 18, he canno...
Prohlad Chandra Chowdhury Vs. Ramsaran Chowdhury and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-11-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal420,81Ind.Cas.680
Mookerjee, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff in a suit for recovery of possession of immovable property, upon cancellation of a lease, granted by his mother on the 5th January, 1913, during his minority. The father of the plaintiff, one Goswami Das Chaudhuri, who died on the 15th September, 1901, had married twice. By his first wife, who died during his lifetime, he left two sons, Bamsaran and Brajanath, the first two defendants in this litigation. By his second wife, Ramani Dasi, who survived him, he left two sons, Prahlad Chandra and Dhruvapada; the former is the plaintiff and the latter is the third defendant in this suit. On the 8th July 1905, Ramani Dasi made an application to the District Judge in order that she might be appointed guardian of the person and property of her minor sons. It was stated in this application that the father of the minors had left debts and that it was necessary to dispose of portions of his estate for the purpose of repayment. On the 16th June, 19...
Bhupendra Kumar Chakrabutty Vs. Surjakanta Rai Chowdhury
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-11-1923
Reported in: 76Ind.Cas.917
1. This is an appeal by the defendant in a suit for ejectment, for assessment of rent and premium, for recovery of arrears, and for incidental reliefs.2. On the 22nd June 1899, the plaintiff granted a Kayami maurasi mokarrari pattah in respect of chakdari jungle lands in the Sunderbunds to one Syamacharan Das. On the 12th January 1902, the representatives of the lessee conveyed their interest to the defendant. The case for the plaintiff is that, whereas under the lease, the defendant is entitled to 2,500 bighas of land, the has managed to obtain possession of 2729 bighas 5 cottahs and II chattaks. The plaintiff, consequently, seeks to recover possession of 229 bighas 5 cottahs and II chattaks. The plaintiff claims, in the alternative, that rent and premium may be settled on all land in excess of 2,000 bighas, which was the original quantity mentioned in the lease, and formed the basis of calculation of the sum payable by the lessee. The plaintiff further prays for recovery of arrears. ...
Maharaja Sasi Kanta Acharyya Bahadur Vs. Abdur Rahman Sarkar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-11-1923
Reported in: 75Ind.Cas.203
1. This is an appeal by the landlord in an apportionment case under the Land Acquisition Act. the Collector valued the land and made an award in favour of the landlord alone on the ground that under the contract of tenancy, the landlord alone was entitled to the entire compensation. The landlord was satisfied with the amount which was thus awarded to him. The tenant, however, obtained an order of reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act to the Land Acquisition Judge, who has held that, apart from what the landlord has received, the tenant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 357-8. The landlord now contends that under the terms of the contract between him and his tenant he is entitled to this additional sum. It is not necessary to consider the legal effect of the terms of the contract between the parties; for it is plain that as the landlord was satisfied with the sum which Was awarded to him by the Collector and never asked for a reference under Section 18, he cannot now deprive ...
Bhupendra Kumar Chakraburty Vs. Suraj Kanta Rai Chowdhury
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-11-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal128
Mookerjee, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant in a suit for ejectment for assessment of rent and premium, for recovery of arrears, and for incidentall reliefs.2. On the 22nd June, 1899, the plaintiff granted a kayami maurasi mokarari pattah in respect of Chakdari jungle lands in the Sunderbuns to one Syamacharan Das. On the 12th January 1902, the representatives; of the lessee conveyed their interest to the defendant. The case for the plaintiff is that, whereas under the lease, the defendant is entitled to 2500 bighas of land, he has managed to obtain possession of 2729 bighas 5 cottahs and 11 chattaks. The plaintiff, consequently, seeks to recover possession of 229 bighas 5 cottahs and 11 chattaks. The plaintiff, claims, in the alternative, that rent and premium maybe settled on all land in excess of 2000 bighas, which was the original quantity mentioned in the lease and formed the basis of calculation of the sum payable by the lessee. The plaintiff further prays for recovery of ...
imperial Tobacco Company Ltd. Vs. Albert Bonnan and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-10-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal216
Sanderson, C.J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment of my learned brother Mr. Justice Pearson which was delivered on the 18th of July 1922, whereby he dismissed the plaintiff's suit.2. This suit was brought for a declaration that the plaintiff company was the sole owner in India, Burma and Aden of a certain brand, trade mark, trade name, covering, wrapper or label and the name W.D. and H.O. Wills, and that the plaintiff company was solely entitled within the said limits to the exclusive right of user thereof and that it was solely entitled to import into and sell in India, Burma and Aden tobacco and cigarettes bearing, or contained in tins, boxes, packets, coverings, wrappers or labels or other receptacles bearing the said brand, trade mark, trade name, covering, wrapper or label or the said name. The plaintiffs' company also asked for an injunction and damages against the defendants.3. The trade mark, brand and names are described in paragraph 6 of the plaint, and a specimen of the ...
Saudamini Dassya and ors. Vs. Secretary of State for India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-10-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal197
Mookerjee, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs in a suit instituted by them with a view to test the legality of an assessment of revenue made under the Bengal Alluvion and Diluvion Act (IX of 1847). The case for the plaintiffs is that the disputed lands, which have been assessed with revenue, belonged to them as appertaining to their estate No. 4823, on the revenue roll of the Collector of Backergunge. They maintain that the assessment would not have been validly made under the provisions of Act IX of 1847 as the lands are not added lands within the meaning of that statute; and they ask for a declaration that the assessment proceedings are without jurisdiction, that the settlement made with the defendants by the Secretary of State is illegal and for consequential relief. On behalf of the Secretary of State, who is the first defendant, the claim, has been resisted on the ground that the disputed lands are not included within estate No. 4828, but are accretions to estates Nos. 1721 ...
The Corporation of Calcutta Vs. Bijoy Kumar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-10-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal334
1. The plaintiffs-respondents are the owners of premises No. 12-1, KPuddopookur Lane, and Nos. 34-1 and 37-3, Watgunge Street, which are bustee lands in occupation of their tenants. The lands are situated within the jurisdiction of the Municipal Corporation of Calcutta and are subject to the operation of Chapter XXVI of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1899 (Act ill of 1899 B.C.). The defendant Corporation called upon the plaintiffs to carry out improvements in the busteea, and upon their failure to comply with the requisition, instituted successive criminal prosecutions to compel execution of the works. The result has been that the plaintiffs have been convicted on no less than eight occasions and sentenced to pay fines of various amounts under Section 575 read with Section 408 of the Calcutta Municipal Act. The plaintiffs have thereupon instituted the present suit for an injunction against the Corporation. The plaintiffs pray that the Corporation be restrained by an injunction (a) from ta...
Hari Chandana Joga Deva Vs. Hindustan Co-operative Insurance Society L ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-10-1923
Reported in: AIR1925Cal690,90Ind.Cas.86
Page, J.1. This is an action brought to recover a sum of Rs. 20,000 as being the principal sum due under a policy of insurance. The policy is for Rs. 20,000, and the annual premium is Rs. 1,550. It is an Endowment Policy for 10 years; the Rs. 1,550 has been regularly and duly paid, and the 10 years have elapsed.2. The defendant company in the first place urges that I ought So read together the proposal for the policy and the policy itself, because it is provided in the policy that the proposal together with the statements made in connection therewith to the Medical Officer is to be deemed to be the basis of the contract. The defendant company further contends that if the proposal and the policy are read together the contract is nod a contract merely for insurance, or indeed primarily for insurance, but is a contract in the first place to take shares in the Company, the annual sum of Rs. 1,000 being treated as in each year a call in respect of the shares, and, secondly, that it is a con...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »