Kolkata Court July 1923 Judgments
PulIn Behari Day and anr. Vs. Ashutosh Ghosh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-31-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal981
Sanderson, C.J.1. This is a Rule calling upon the District Magistrate and the opposite party to show cause why the case should not be transferred from the Magistrate who is trying the case to some other Magistrate competent to try the same.2. The only ground which, in my judgment, it is necessary to consider in respect of this matter is that the petitioner has alleged that the Magistrate's brother has been active in certain electioneering matters and that the complainant has been closely connected with the Magistrate's brother in that respect, and that the Magistrate himself is assisting his brother in this electioneering chiefly by way of canvassing.3. I am prepared to accept what the Magistrate has said in his explanation, and it must be clearly understood that the making of this Rule absolute does not cast any slur whatsoever upon the Magistrate or upon the conduct of the case by him. But it is clear that the petitioners have some apprehension that the Magistrate, perhaps unconsciou...
Tag this Judgment!Jyoti Prakash Nandi Vs. Mukti Prakash Nandi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-31-1923
Reported in: (1924)ILR51Cal150
1. This appeal arises out of proceedings in execution of a decree. The respondents obtained a decree against the judgment-debtor Jyoti Prakash and put it into execution pending an appeal preferred by Jyoti Prakash against the decree. Upon an application made by the latter for stay of execution-proceedings, this Court directed proceedings to be stayed upon Jyoti Prakash furnishing security to the satisfaction of the Court below. Thereupon a security-bond was executed by Jyoti Prakash on the 6th May, 1915. The appeal was ultimately dismissed. The respondents having applied for execution of the decree by attachment and sale of the properties covered by the security bond which had been executed by Jyoti Prakash the sons and wife of Jyoti Prakash instituted a suit or declaration that the properties were not liable to be sold in execution of the decree obtained by the respondents against their father and pending that suit, the sons of the appellant obtained an injunction restraining the resp...
Tag this Judgment!PulIn Behary Dey and anr. Vs. Ashutosh Ghose
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-31-1923
Reported in: 81Ind.Cas.560
Sanderson, C.J.1. This is a Rule calling upon the District Magistrate and the opposite party to show cause why the case should not be transferred from the Magistrate who is trying the case to some other Magistrate competent to try the same.2. The only ground which, in my judgment, it is necessary to consider in respect of this matter is that the petitioner has alleged that the Magistrate's brother has been active in certain, electioneering matters and that the complainant has been closely connected with the Magistrate's brother in that respect and that the Magistrate himself is assisting his brother in this electioneering, chiefly by way of canvassing.3. I am prepared to accept what the Magistrate has said in his explanation,, and, it must be clearly understood that the making of this Rule absolute does, not cast any slur whatsoever upon the, Magistrate or upon, the conduct of, the case by hini. But it is clear that petitioners have some apprehension that the Magistrate, perhaps uncons...
Tag this Judgment!Jyoti Prakash Nandi Vs. Mukti Prakash Nandi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-31-1923
Reported in: 81Ind.Cas.734
1. This appeal arises out of proceedings in execution of a decree. The respondents obtained a decree against the judgment-debtor, Jyoti Prakash, and put it into execution pending an appeal preferred by Jyoti Prakash against the decree. Upon an application made by the latter for stay of execution proceedings, this Court directed proceedings to be stayed upon Jyoti Prakash furnishing security to the satisfaction of the Court below. Thereupon a security bond was executed by Jyoti Prakash on the 6th May 1915. The appeal was ultimately dismissed. The respondents having applied for execution of the decree by attachment and sale of the properties covered by the security bond which had been executed by Jyoti Prakash, the sons and wife of Jyoti Prakash instituted a suit for a declaration that the properties were not liable to be sold in execution of the decree obtained by the respondents against their father and pending that suit, the sons of the appellant obtained an injunction restraining the...
Tag this Judgment!Radha Raman Kundu Vs. Gopal Chander Sinha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-30-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal208,80Ind.Cas.513
1. The Petitioner in this case obtained a certificate of succession under Act VII of 1889 to collect certain debts of one Gour Sunder Kundu, Subsequently he applied for extension of the certificate under Section 10 of the Act to collect other debts. That application was refused by the Munsif who was empowered to deal with applications under this Act. An appeal against his order was preferred to the District Judge, and he on the authority of the Madras High Court, Venkateswarlu v. Brahmaravuthu Raja Krishnaji (1901) 25 Mad. 634, held that no appeal lay. We are unable to accept the view of the learned District Judge. He has overlooked the fact that there is a marked difference between the facts of the present case and those of the case on which he relied. In the Madras case the appeal was preferred against an order granting an application under Section 10 for extension. Here the appeal is against an order refusing such an extension. Section 19 read with the proviso to Clause (2) of Secti...
Tag this Judgment!Basanta Kumar Chakravarti Vs. Ashutosh Chakravarti and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-30-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal214,80Ind.Cas.654
1. This Rule has been granted on the application of Basanta Kumar Chakravarti who is a co-sharer in certain property and was for merly appointed common manager under Section 93 of the Bengal Tenancy Act. The learned District Judge has on the objection of other co-sharers removed the Petitioner from the post of the common manager and appointed one Brojendra Lal Sen as the common manager of the estate.2. The Rule was directed against three orders passed by the learned District Judge. At the hearing of this Rule the only point pressed is that the learned District Judge by his order of the 25th November, 1922, rejected an application objecting to the appointment of the new common manager on the ground that he could not be appointed to the properties, since some of the properties did not include the whole estate or tenure of which the Chakravartis were the co-sharers. We think that in dealing with this application the learned District Judge proceeded on a wrong principle. He appears to have...
Tag this Judgment!Hassenulla Sheikh Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-30-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal625,83Ind.Cas.485
1. Hassenulla Sheikh has been sentenced to death by the first Additional Sessions Judge of Mymensingh and the proceedings have been submitted to this Court under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Hassenulla Sheikh has also appealed against his conviction and so have two other accused, Rezatulla Sheikh and Tamez Sheikh who were convicted at the same trial. Hassenulla presented a separate jail appeal, and also a joint appeal on behalf of the three accused was filed by their pleader.2. In addition to these three appellants, one Farid Sheikh was also tried with them. Hassenulla Sheikh was charged on two separate counts with having committed murder of two persons, Moulavi Mahjazal Huq and Kaimulla. The other three-accused were charged on two separate counts with having, in furtherance of the common intention of all, committed murder of these two persons, offences punishable under Section 302, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Rezatulla was further charged with havi...
Tag this Judgment!Sivadas Mukerjee Vs. Surendra Nath Chatterjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-30-1923
Reported in: 82Ind.Cas.382
1. This is an application made under Sections 151 and 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure for amendment of the judgment of this Court in Appeal from Original Decree, No. 23 of 1920.2. Section 151 presumes the inherent power of the Court to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the Court. Section 152 authorises the Court to correct clerical or arithmetical mistakes in judgments, decrees or orders or errors arising therein from any accidental slip or omission. This may be done by the Court either of its own motion or on the application of any of the parties. Section 153 provides that the Court may, at any time, and on such terms as to costs or otherwise as it may think fit, amend any defect or error in any proceeding in a suit and all necessary amendments shall be made for the purpose of determining the real question or issue raised by or depending on such proceeding. We have no doubt that in the events which have happened it is...
Tag this Judgment!Charu Chandra Ghose and ors. Vs. King-emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-27-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal502
1. The appellants in appeal No. 408 were four persons named Charu Chandra Ghose, Akhoy Kumar Rooj, Akhoy Kumar Pal and Jiban Chandra Roy alias Jiban Krishna Ray; the latter died after the appeal had been filed and at the present moment the appellants are the three first named persons. In appeal No. 409, the appellants are three in number, namely, Ganpat Pandey, Rajani Kant Samui and Charitar Muchi alias Ram Charitar Muchi. The above named seven persons, along with six others, were tried under Section 120-B, read with Section 420, read with Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code, before the Additional Sessions Judge of Burdwan and a jury. The jury convicted the said seven persons and the learned Judge agreeing with the verdict of the jury, sentenced the said seven persons to various terms of imprisonment as under, viz., the accused Charu Chandra Ghose to three years' rigorous imprisonment; the accused Akhoy Kumar Rooj and Jiban Chandra Roy to two years' rigorous imprisonment; the accused ...
Tag this Judgment!Muller Maclean and Co. Vs. S.M. Ataula and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-27-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal778
Page, J.1. In this case the plaintiff Company, which is incorporated in the United States of America, has obtained a decree for the value of eight bills of exchange, the value of six being stated in the dollar currency of the United States, and the value of two in sterling. The question which now falls for determination is whether the decretal amount in rupees is to be calculated in accordance with, the rate of exchange prevailing on the respective dates when the bills matured for payment, or, as the plaintiffs contend, with the rate of exchange prevailing at the date when the decree was passed. In the absence of an agreement between the parties to the contrary, I am of opinion that the decretal amount in. the case of each bill is to be calculated in accordance with the rate of exchange prevailing on the date when the cause of action arose. In my judgment, the same rule is to be applied whether the cause of action is for a debt or for damages, and whether it sounds in contract or in to...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »