Kolkata Court July 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.
Banka Behari Das Vs. Guru Das Dhar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-19-1923
Reported in: 80Ind.Cas.257
B.B. Ghose, J.1. The plaintiff, who was the auction-purchaser at a sale in execution of a decree for rent, sued both the decree-holder and the judgment-debtor for refund of the purchase-money and also for compensation on certain allegations made in the plaint. The suit was decreed in the primary Court against both the defendants. On appeal by the decree-holder defendant, the learned Judge dismissed the suit holding that it was not maintainable. The plaintiff appeals' to this Court and two questions have been raised on his behalf: (1) Whether a suit for refund of purchase-money is maintainable by the auction-purchaser on the ground that the judgment-debtor had no saleable interest in the land, and (2) whether the suit is maintainable on the ground of fraud of the defendants.2. With regard to the first question, the learned Vakil for the appellant has placed before us all the cases decided by the different High Courts with reference to sales held after the Code of Civil Procedure of 1908...
Baikanta Nath Ghose Vs. Bhuban Chandra Mahapatra and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-18-1923
Reported in: AIR1928Cal273
Sanderson, C.J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff against the judgment of the learned Additional District Judge of Midnapur.2. The point which arises on this appeal may he stated in the words of the learned District Judge at the beginning of his judgment, whether the landlord's claim for khas possession of the lands of a non-transferable occupancy holding is debarred by his having recognized a private purchase and he is estopped from suing for khas possession.3. The learned vakil for the appellant has drawn our attention to several oases in which the Court had to deal with a dakhila granted to a transferee of a non-transferable occupancy holding as marfatdar of the original tenant : and, the learned vakil contended that the principle of those cases should be applied to this case and the appeal should be allowed.4. In my judgment the principle which should be applied to such a casa as this was laid down by Sir Lawrence Jenkins when he was the Chief Justice of this Court, in the case ...
Sadek Ali Vs. Samed Ali Serang
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-17-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal193
Rankin, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant in an ejectment suit. The defendant's defence was a denial of the plaintiff's title. The plaintiff claimed title as purchaser at an execution sale against one Majammil Mea under a Small Cause Court decree for money obtained under the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act. It appears that in the Small Cause Court at Sealdah he obtained an attachment of the land now in suit before judgment, that there was an investigation of claim held under Order 21, Rule 63, C.P.C, that the claimant succeeded and that the plaintiff then brought a suit to establish the right of his judgment-debtor, but that suit was withdrawn. Later the decree was transferred to the ordinary Civil Court; the property was attached and sold to him ignoring the previous claim case.2. The Munsiff held that the Small Cause Court had power to attach immovables before judgment and to decide the claim case. Accordingly he dismissed the plaintiff's suit holding that the plaintiff had n...
Das Ram Chowdhury and ors. Vs. Tirtha Nath Das and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-17-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal481
Ghose, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the reversionary heirs of one Asradhi Das for a declaration that a certain sale of the property left by him is not binding on the estate after the death of Jagat Priya the daughter of Asradhi. The relevant facts are these: Asradhi died in 1888 leaving four daughters surviving him. Two of them Saroda and Parbati were married during his lifetime. The maiden daughters Bama and Jagat Priya who were infants inherited their father's properties under the Hindu Law. Asradhi's mother Sarumala was appointed guardian of the infants under Act XL of 1858 in November 1888. Sometime after that Bama died unmarried. Jagat Priya then became the sole owner having a Hindu woman's estate in her father's properties. On 24th April, 1891, Sarumala, the guardian, sold the lands in dispute to the defendant without obtaining the permission of the Court as required by the law. Plaintiffs Nos. 1 and 2 are the sons of the two other daughters of Asradhi and pla...
William Rowe Rae Vs. Lewis Pugh, Evans Pugh and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-17-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal940,83Ind.Cas.970
Mookerjee, J.1. The facts material for the determination of the questions raised in these two appeals, which have been heard one after the other, lie in a brief compass and may be shortly narrated.2. On the 11th June, 1914, Pugh and Bowden formed a syndicate to work a deposit of China clay in the district of Bhagalpur upon the terms that Pugh should provide the finance and have a ten annas share, while Bowden should work the property and have a six annas share, all properties acquired by Bowden in the district to be on syndicate account. Subsequent to the date of this agreement, Bowden acquired a two-fifths interest in leases of certain property in the locality mentioned, and a certain amount of China clay was extracted though the progress of the prospecting and developing scheme was by no means satisfactory. The position thus was that though Pugh provided the influence required, and Bowden the expert knowledge necessary a financier was needed as a complement, if the business was to be...
Bilodev Sarma Khanud Vs. Souti Bordalai
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-17-1923
Reported in: AIR1925Cal207
1. In this case, the appellant is a plaintiff decree-holder who obtained a decree on the 20th June, 1914, against two persons. On the 15th May, 1916, an execution sale of the properties of one of the debtors was held at which the decree-holder himself was the purchaser and this sale was confirmed on the 15th June, 1916. On that day final satisfaction of the decree was entered up and the execution case was struck off. The position is that the execution case was struck off because the decree was taken to be satisfied. The decree-holder chose to pay a certain sum of money for his judgment-debtor's right, title and interest. He did not make any application under the Code within the time limited by law, nor did he bring a suit within a year for the purpose of having it ascertained that nothing had passed to him by the sale or for a declaration that the sale was void or voidable and should be set aside. The case is not one of the execution proceedings being obstructed or delayed by suits bei...
Das Ram Chowdhury Vs. Tirtha Nath Das and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-17-1923
Reported in: (1924)ILR51Cal101,81Ind.Cas.522
Ghose, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the reversionary heirs of one Asradhi Das for a declaration that a certain sale of the property left by him is not binding on the estate after the death of Jagat Priya, the daughter of Asradhi. The relevant facts are theseAsradhi died in 1888 leaving four daughters him surviving. Two of them Saroda and Parbati were married during his life time. The two maiden daughters Rama and Jagat Priya who were infants inherited their father's properties under the Hindu Law. Asradhi's mother, Sarumala, was appointed guardian of the infants under Act XL of 1858 in November 1888. Some time after that Rama died unmarried. Jagat Priya then became the sole owner having a Hindu woman's estate in her father's properties. On 24th April 1891 Sarumala, the guardian, sold the lands in dispute to the defendant without obtaining the permission of the Court as required by the law. Plaintiffs Nos. 1 and 2 are the sons of the two other daughters of Asradhi an...
Balodev Sarma Khanud Vs. Sonti Bordoloi and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-17-1923
Reported in: 84Ind.Cas.983
1. In this case, the appellant is a plaintiff decree-holder who obtained a decree on the 20th June, 1914, against two persons. On the 15th May 1916 an execution sale of the properties of one of the debtors was held at which the decree-holder himself was the purchaser and this sale was confirmed on the 15th June 1916. On that day, final satisfaction of the decree was entered up and the execution case was struck off. The position is that the execution case was struck off because the decree was taken to be satisfied. The decree-holder chose to pay a certain sum of money for his judgment-debtor's right, title and interest. He did not make any application under the Code within the lime limited by law nor did he bring a suit within a year for the purpose of having it ascertained that nothing had passed to him by the sale or for a declaration that the sale aves void or voidable and should be set aside. The case is not one of execution proceedings being obstructed or delayed by suits being bro...
Chandmull Kangoria Vs. Debi Chand and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal405,80Ind.Cas.317
Page, J.1. This application involves the determination of an important question of practice.2. It is an application by the defendant, which, by consent of the parties has been treated as an application under Order 47, to review an order awarding the plaintiff costs.3. The plaintiff brought a suit in the High Court claiming damages for trespass to his land by reason of the unauthorised deposit thereon of building material by the defendant. The plaintiff in his plaint claimed Rs. 5,300 as damages and obtained a decree for Rs. 10, and costs were awarded to him on the High Court Scale No. II.4. The defendant now applies for a review of the above order relating to costs on the ground that the suit was cognisable by the Court of Small Causes of Calcutta, and, inasmuch as the plaintiff obtained a decree for damages for trespass of an amount less than Rs. 300, the Court had no jurisdiction to award him any costs by reason of the provisions of Section 22 of the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act...
Promila Bala Debi Vs. Jyotindra Nath Banerji and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Cal631
ORDER1. This is a Rule for the appointment of an administrator pendente lite under Section 34 of the Probate and Administration Act during the pendency of an appeal lodged in this Court against the decree for grant of probate in respect of the estate of one Haricharan Mukherjee who died on the 25th February, 1921.2. On the 29th June, 1921, the executors applied for probate of the alleged will. On the 20th July, 1921, the objectors prayed for the appointment of an administrator pendente lite and five days later their application was granted, as the District Judge recorded the opinion that the grounds urge for the appointment of an administrator pendente lite were very strong. On the 27th July, 1921, upon the joint application of all the parties concerned, Babu Bibhuti Bhushan Banerjee was appointed administrator pendente lite on a fixed remuneration of Rs. 60 a month. The application for probate was strenuously contested; but ultimately judgment was pronounced on the 25th May, 1923, in ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »