Kolkata Court June 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.
Gopal Chandra Pal Vs. Kadambini Dasi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-16-1923
Reported in: 73Ind.Cas.235
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff in a suit for partition of joint property. The plaintiff and the first defendant are two brothers and this litigation was commenced by the plaintiff for division of the properties jointly held by then. Subsequently, the third defendnat, the widow of another brother of the plaintiff and the first defendant, who is now dead, was joined as a defendant. The husband of this lady died during the lifetime of the father of the plaintiff and consequently never became entitled to the properties of his father. The lady claimed that provision might be made in the decree for her maintenance. The District Judge has given effect to this contention: and the only point in controversy in this appeal is, whether provision should be made for her maintenance in the' decree for partition. Three points have been raised before us; namely, first, that the added defendant has no right of maintenance as against the estate received by her b; other-in-law from their father; se...
Girdharilal Honuman Bux Vs. Eagle Star and British Dominions Insurance ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-15-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal186
Greaves, J.1. The Plaintiffs insured with the Defendant Company under two policies, dated the 4th November 1920 and. 28th February 1921, loose jute at Kissengunge in the District of Purneah.2. The insurances were effected subject to the terms and conditions endorsed or otherwise expressed on the policies.3. Both policies contained a condition (No. 13) which so far as material is to this effect:If the claim be made and rejected and an action or suit be not commenced within three months after such rejection or (in case of arbitration taking place in pursuance of the 18th condition of this policy) within three months after the arbitrator or arbitrators or umpire shall have made their award, all benefit under this policy shall be forfeited. For the purpose of these proceedings the following facts are admitted as correct by both parties to the suit. The jute insured under the policies was destroyed by fire on the 7th June 1921, the plain-tiffs submitted their claims under the policies on th...
Monmatha Kumar Ray Vs. Josada Lal Podder and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-15-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal647,77Ind.Cas.551
1. This appeal arises out of a suit in ejectment. The defendants Nos. 2 and 3 were the owners of a non-transferable occupancy holding under the plaintiff. They mortgaged their interest to defendant No. 1 who subsequently purchased that interest in execution of his mortgage decree. After that the defendants Nos. 2 and 3 executed a kabuliyat in favour of defendant No. 1 and remained in possession of the land. The Munaif gave the plaintiff a decree on contest against the defendant No. 1 and ex parte against the defendants Nos. 2 and 3 who did not appear in the suit. The plaintiff's title was declared and it was directed that he should recover khas possession of the same as against the defendants. On appeal the findings of fact of the first Court were upheld, but the decree was varied to the extent that the prayer for khas possession as against defendants Nos. 2 and 3 was rejected; but it was declared that the defendant No. 1 had no title to the disputed land as against the plaintiff. Agai...
Giridharilal Hanumanbux Vs. Eagle Star and British Dominions Insurance ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-15-1923
Reported in: 80Ind.Cas.637
Greaves, J.1. The plaintiffs insured with the defendant Company under two policies, dated the 4th November 1920 and the 28th February 1921 loose jute at Kissengunge in the District of Purneah.2. The insurances were effected subject to the terms and conditions endorsed or otherwise expressed on the policies.3. Both policies contained a condition (No. 13) which so far as is material is to this effect:4. 'If the claim be made and rejected and an action or suit be not commenced within three months after such rejection or (in case of an arbitration taking place in pursuance of the 18th condition of this policy) within three months after the arbitrator or arbitrators or umpire shall have made their award, all benefit under this policy shall be forfeited.' For the purpose of these proceedings the following facts are admitted as correct by both parties to the suit. The jute insured under the policies was destroyed by fire on the 7th June 1921, the plaintiffs submitted their claims under the po...
Sukur Mahamed Vs. Asmot Mandal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-14-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal384
Suhrawardy, J.1. The facts giving rise to the suit from which this appeal arises are these. One Naibulla was the owner of a jote of Rs. 4-6. He died leaving three sons, Bisha, Bahulla and Abdul and a widow, the defendant No. 5 in the present case, and three daughters defendants Nos. 6, 7 and 8, as his heirs. There was a mortgage of this jote effected by Naibulla. A suit was brought upon the mortgage and a decree obtained and the property was sold in execution of that decree. The plaintiff's case is that thereafter two of the sons of Naibulla, namely, Bisha and Bahulla, who were in possession of the property left by Naibulla, sold 2 pakhis of land to them for Rs. 100 and some other land to another person and, with the money thus realised they paid off the mortgage decree and got back, the property. The plaintiff further says that he was in possession of the two pakhis purchased by him from October 30th, 1900, the date of his purchase, till he was dispossessed from a moiety of the said l...
Sukur Mahomed Vs. Asmot Mandal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-14-1923
Reported in: 79Ind.Cas.491
Suhrawardy, J.1. The facts giving rise to the suit from which this appeal arises are these. One Naibulla was the owner of a jote of Rs. 4-6. He died leaving three sons, Bisha, Bahulla and Abdul, and a widow, the defendant No. 5 in the present case, and three daughters, defendants Nos 6, 7 and 8, as his heirs. There was a mortgage of this jote ffected by Naibulla. A suit was brought upon the mortgage and a decree obtained and the property was sold in execution of that decree. The plaintiff's case is that thereafter two of the sons of Naibulla, namely, Bisha and Bahulla, who were in possession of the property left by Naibullah sold two pakhis of land to them for Rs. 100 and some other land to another person and with the money thus realised they paid off the mortgage-decree and got back the property. The plaintiff further says that he was in possession of the two pakhis purchased by him from October 30th, 1900, the date of his purchase, till he was dispossessed from a moiety of the said l...
Jagadamba Debi Vs. Uma Sankar De and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-13-1923
Reported in: AIR1928Cal220
Suhrawardy, J.1. These three appeals arise out of three rent suits in respect of three holdings which the plaintiff has purchased from the heirs of the holder of a patni tenure. The defendant pleaded that the areas of the holdings and the rents were not correctly described. The plaintiff accepted the defendants' statement as the amount of the jamas and the suits were decreed by the first Court accordingly. The defendants appealed to the District Judge on the ground that the plaintiff should not have been allowed to amend her plaint and that the suits ought to have been dismissed. The learned Judge, while dismissing the appeals, gave effect to a plea not taken in the grounds of appeal before him or raised in the first Court, viz., that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover the rent claimed under Section 16, Ben. Ten. Act as she had not observed the procedure as laid down under Section 15, of the Act. The learned Judge, in dismissing the defendants' appeal, added a rider that the pla...
In Re: Bishnu Priya Chowdhurani
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-13-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal337
Sanderson, C.J.1. In accordance with the request contained in their order, dated 16th January, 1923, on the petition of Babu Iswar Chandra Chowdhuri to state a case under the provisions of Section 66 of the Indian Income Tax Act (XI of 1922), I have the honour to submit the following for the opinion of the Hon'ble High Court.2. History of the Case:The petitioner submitted a return of his income in accordance with Section 22(2) of the Act on the 24th June, 1922, in which he declared an income of Rs. 3,966-11-2, which income included nothing on account of bastu rents. His accounts were called for and examined on the 1st August following and he was assessed by his Income Tax Officer on Rs. 7,307 including Rs. 1,528-6-4 on account of bastu rents, calculated at 21/2 per cent, on the assessee's gross rental of Rs. 63,136. It is the inclusion of this item and the method by which the figure has been calculated which forms the subject of the present reference.On the 16th October following, an a...
In Re: Meghraj Purohit (insolvent)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-12-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal83
Greaves, J.1. Two petitions are before me in this matter both filed by a creditor, one Nandalal Acharya.2. By the first petition, filed on the 7th May, the creditor seeks to set aside an order of the 27th April, 1923 annulling a previous adjudication and by the second petition a fresh order of adjudication is sought.3. The facts are as follows : Meghraj Purohit was adjudicated an insolvent on the 29th August 1921 at the instance of a creditor. On the 27th April 1923 the Registrar in Insolvency at the instance of a creditor, the Bombay Holland Trading Company, Ltd., annulled the adjudication order under the provisions of Section 41 of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act as the insolvent had not applied for his discharge within the time fixed by Rule 142-A of the Insolvency Rules. The application was made upon notice to the insolvent and to the Official Assignee and it was advertised in the Calcutta Gazette as provided by Rule 142-B.4. Now it is urged that the Registrar had no jurisdicti...
In Re: Meghraj Purohit
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-12-1923
Reported in: 80Ind.Cas.840
Greaves, J.1. Two petitions are before me in this matter both filed by a creditor, one Nandalal Acharya.2. By the first petition, filed on the 7th May, the creditor seeks to set aside an order of the 27th April 1923 annulling a previous adjudication and by the second petition a fresh order of adjudication is sought.3. The facts are as follows: Meghraj Purohit was adjudicated an insolvent on the 29th August 1921 at the instance of a creditor. On the 27th April 1923 the Registrar in Insolvency at the instance of a creditor, the Bombay Holland Trading Company, Ltd., annulled the adjudication order under the provisions of Section 41 of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act as the insolvent had not applied for his discharge within the time fixed by Rule 142A of the Insolvency Rules. The application was made upon notice to the insolvent and to the Official Assignee and it was advertised in the Calcutta Gazette as provided by Rule 142B.4. Now it is urged that the Registrar had no jurisdiction t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »