Kolkata Court November 1924 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.
Mohamed Nuru AmIn and ors. Vs. Monohar Saran Deb Mohanta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-12-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal473
1. This appeal raises an interesting question which requires some consideration. In a mortgage suit, the plaintiff (predecessor of the present respondent) died on the 28th January 1916 and the defendant died on the 8th July 1916. After the preliminary decree was passed by the High Court on the 13th July 1915 no application for substitution of the deceased parties seems to have been made till the 15th July 1918 when an application was made by the heirs of the deceased plaintiff for substitution of their names in place of the deceased plaintiff and for substitution of the heirs of the deceased defendant after Betting aside the abatement and for a final decree. That application was dismissed for default on the 4th September 1918. But during the interval between the filing of the application and its dismissal the heirs of the plaintiff had parted with their interest in the mortgage in favour of the present respondent. The respondent thereupon filed an application on the 3rd September 1918 ...
Sayma Bibi Vs. Madhusudan Mohanta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-12-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal766
1. This appeal raises an interesting question which requires some consideration. In a mortgage suit, the plaintiff (predecessor of the present respondent) died on the 28th January, 1916, and the defendant died on the 8th July, 1916, after the preliminary decree was passed by the High Court on the 13th July, 1915. No application for substitution of the deceased parties seems to have been made till the 15th July, 1918 when an application was made by the heirs of the deceased plaintiff for substitution of their names in place of the deceased plaintiff and for substitution of the heirs of the deceased defendant after setting aside the abatement and for a final decree. That application was dismissed for default on the 4th September, 1918. But during the interval between the filing of the application and its dismissal the heirs of the plaintiff bad parted with their interest in the mortgage in favour of the present respondent. The respondent thereupon filed an application on the 3rd Septembe...
Ahed Fakir and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-12-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal1235,87Ind.Cas.98
1. The appellants before us were put on their trial on several charges. They were all charged with rioting punishable under Section 147, Indian Penal Code. The appellant, Ahed Fakir, was charged with having committed culpable homicide not amounting, to murder by causing the death of Mohorulla. The other appellants were charged with being constructively guilty of culpable homicide under the provisions of Section 149, Indian Penal Code, and one of the appellants, Baksu Fakir, was charged with committing simple Court with a dangerous weapon to one Omed Ali. The Jury unanimously found all the appellants guilty of rioting. They found Ahed Fakir guilty of the minor offence of voluntarily causing grievous hurt to Mohorulla. On the other charges they returned a verdict of not guilty. The main facts of the case appear to be as follows: Khos Mahmud and Lal Mahmud ahas Tunya are two brothers. Their father Lost Mahmud died about four years ago leaving some laud, which was inherited by these two. T...
Mohamed Nurul AmIn and ors. Vs. Monohar Soran Deb Mohanta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-12-1924
Reported in: 85Ind.Cas.100
1. This appeal raises ail interesting question which requires some consideration. In a mortgage suit, the plaintiff (predecessor of. the present respondent) died on the 28th January 1916 and the defendant died on the 8th July 1916. Alter the preliminary decree was passed by the High Court on the 13th July 1915 no application for substitution of the deceased parties seems to have been, made till the 15th July 1918 when an application was made by the heirs of the deceased plaintiff for substitution of their names in place of the deceased plaintiff and for substitution of the heirs of the deceased defendant after setting aside the abatement and for a final decree. That application was dismissed for default on the 4th September 1918. But during the interval between the filing of the application and its dismissal the heirs of the plaintiff had parted with their interest in the mortgage in favour of the present respondent. The respondent thereupon filed an application on the 3rd September 19...
(Sir) Hukumchand Kasliwal and anr. Vs. Radhakissen Chamaria and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-11-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal916
Sanderson, C.J.1. These two appeals, which are Nos. 88 of 1924 and No. 89 of 1924, have been argued one after the other. They arise out of an application made by the Respondents Radhakissen Chamaria and Motilal Chamaria, which was disposed of by my learned brother Mr. Justice C.C. Ghose on the 1st of April 1924.2. In Appeal No. 83 the appellants are Sir Hukumchand Kasliwal and another and, in appeal No. 89 the appellants are Bilasroy Hurdut Roy.3. The facts, which have been stated both by the learned Advocate General who appeared for the appellants in Appeal No. 88 and by the learned Counsel who appeared for the Appellants in Appeal No. 89, are as follows:4. It is alleged that on the 14th of February 1920 Sir Hukumchand Kasliwal and Harkissen Das Bhattar entered into an agreement with the Pioneer Mills Limited (which was a joint-stock Company having its registered office in Calcutta and carrying on business as refiners, manufacturers and dealers in sugar at Unao in the United Provinces...
Hem Kanta Ghosh and ors. Vs. Srimati Monoj Prova Singha and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-11-1924
Reported in: 87Ind.Cas.173
1. This Rule is directed against an order of the District Judge of Howrah, dated the 27th June. 1924 rejecting the appeal preferred fey the petitioners on the ground that no appeal lay from the order of the Court below and in the alternative the Rule is directed against an order passed by the Subordinate Judge of Howrah dated the 28th July 1923 (wrongly mentioned as dated the 8th July 1923 in the order-sheet issuing the Rule,). No one appears on behalf of the opposite parties, though the service upon them has been found to be in order. The facts are that one Becharam Singh instituted a suit against the petitioners in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Howrah. Subsequent to the institution of the suit he died, according to the petitioners, on the 21st February 1922 and according to the opposite party, on the 21st March 1922; On the 2nd June 1922, an application was made on behalf of the widow for substitution in place of the deceased plaintiff on the allegation that the plaintiff had...
Hem Kanta Ghosh and anr. Vs. Monoj Prova Singha and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-11-1924
Reported in: AIR1926Cal444
1. This Rule is directed against an order of the District Judge of Howrah, dated the 27th June 1924 rejecting the appeal preferred by the petitioners on the ground that no appeal lay from the order of the Court below and in the alternative the Rule is directed against an order passed by the Subordinate Judge of Howrah, dated the 28th July 1923 (wrongly mentioned as dated the 8th July 1923 in the order-sheet issuing the Rule). No one appears on behalf of the opposite parties, though the service upon them has been found to be in order. The facts are that one Becharam Singh instituted a suit against the petitioners in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Howrah. Subsequent to the institution of the suit he died, according to the petitioners, on the 21st February 1922, and according to the opposite party, on the 21st March 1922. On the 2nd June 1922, an application was made on behalf of the widow for substitution in place of the deceased plaintiff on the allegation that the plaintiff had ...
i.G. Singleton Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-07-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal501
Mukerji, J.1. The appellant I.G. Singleton has been convicted by the Sessions Judge of 24-Parganas in agreement with the unanimous verdict of the jury on charges under Section 409 and 409/120-B of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 9 months under Section 409, I.P.C., no separate sentence having been passed under Section 409/120-B, I.P.C.2. The facts of the case alleged against him on behalf of the prosecution are set out in sufficient details in the summing up of the learned Judge and it will serve no useful purpose by recapitulating them here. The charge under Section 409, I.P.C. alleged that on the 27th February, 1924, the appellant being a public servant in the employ of the Customs Department committed criminal broach of trust in respect of 34 bags of peacock feathers over which he had dominion as such public; servant. The charge under Section 409/120-B, I.P.C., averred that on the same data he conspired with one Basanta Singh to commi...
Mahabir Singh and anr. Vs. Giribala Dassi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-07-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal742
1. The complaint in the present ease was filed before Mr. D. Dutt, Deputy Magistrate of Howrah, on the. 10th May, 1924, and he on examining the complainant was of opinion that it was apparently a petty altercation and he made an order that Babu H.P. Roy Chaudhury, an Honorary Magistrates should enquire into it and submit a report. This order was evidently passed under the provisions of Section 202, Cr. P.C. In ordinary course on the report of Mr. H.P. Roy Chaudhury being submitted Mr, D. Dutt could have either dismissed the complaint or issued process. Matters, however, took quite a different turn. After several adjournments in consequence of the report not having arrived, Mr. D. Dutt on the 1st August, 1924 passed an order which ran as follows :-The cross-case has been disposed of by Mr. A. C. Bose. This case is therefore sent to him for disposal.' It may be said that there was a cross-case which had in the meantime been disposed of by the Deputy Magistrate Mr. A. G. Bose. On the 2nd ...
Nawab Ali Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-07-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal816,(1925)ILR52Cal470
2. It is clear that the provisions of Section 360 of the Criminal Procedure Code were not complied with in the present inquiry. The order passed by the learned Magistrate is accordingly set aside, and further inquiry directed-such inquiry to be held by some Magistrate other than the Magistrate who bad dealt with the case....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »