Kolkata Court February 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.
Baharuddy Sikdar Vs. the King-emperor (on the Complaint of Sheikh Easi ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-20-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Cal986
Panton, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 476-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure against an order of the learned Sessions Judge of Bakarganj, dated the 24th of September, 1923, in which he made a complaint to the District Magistrate of an offence under Section 193 of the Indian Penal Code, and any other appropriate sections, alleged to have been committed by the present petitioner Baharuddy Sikdar in relation to a trial before the Assistant Sessions Judge of Bakarganj. These offences are said to have been committed in respect of certain documents which were filed by the defence in the trial before the Assistant Sessions Judge. They are a kabuliat, a mortgage-bond and some other documents.2. Various grounds have been urged before us for holding that the order of the learned Sessions Judge was not in accordance with law. It is, however, unnecessary to go into all the points raised by the learned Vakil for the appellant because we think that the appeal must succeed upon one single gro...
Bahadurmull Rampuria Vs. Tricumdas Callianji and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-20-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal561
1. These two appeals are directed against an order passed by the Court below under Order 38, Rule 5, Civil Procedure Code, attaching before judgment a sum of 3 lacs of rupees alleged to be due to defendant No. 1 from defendants Nos. 2 to 4. The facts of the case relevant to the present enquiry may be shortly stated thus:-The defendant No. 1 sold to defendants Nos. 2 to 4 (who may be shortly called the Rampurias) a certain mill called Callian Cotton Mills for Rs. 5 lacs by an Indenture dated the 21st July, 1921. The mill was under mortgage to one Manik Lal Mansukbhai and the sale was subject to the mortgage. On the same day an agreement was entered into between defendant No. 1 and the Rampurias under which the Rampurias bound themselves to pay half the charge which was estimated at Rs. 3 lacs and if the amount they had to pay to the mortgagee was less than that sum, or nothing at all, they would pay to defendant No. 1 the said sum of Rs. 3 lacs or the balance thereof less the sum paid t...
Ahmed Bepari Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-20-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal578,84Ind.Cas.434
1. The accused Ahmed Bepari has been convicted of an offence under Section 36G of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment. Two charges were originally framed against him, one under Section 363 that is to Bay of having kidnapped Hazra a minor girl from the lawful guardianship of her mother, and the other of the offence in respect of which the accused was convicted. He was acquitted of having kidnapped Hazra from the lawful guardianship of her mother and the Jury have accepted the fact that Hazra's mother consented to handing her over and ultimately to the accused marrying her. Now, Hazra, the girl in respect of whom the offence is said to have been committed, is or was at the time of the offence some 10 or 11 years of age. Her father was dead and her mother accordingly was the guardian of her person according to the Muhammadan Law but for the purposes of her marriage during her minority, her guardian was her brother who certainly never consented to the ma...
Baheruddy Sikdar Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-20-1924
Reported in: 81Ind.Cas.919
1. Sheikh Salimuddi and Sheikh Alimuddi, brothers of the appellant, were tried before the Assistant Sessions Judge of Barisal for forcibly cutting and taking away paddy from the field of the complainant Sheikh Iasin and causing grievous hurt. The defence was that the disputed land belonged to the appellant Baheruddy and one kabuliyut, one mortgage-bond purported to have been executed by Baheruddy in favour of the complainant, and two dakhilas purported to have been granted by the complainant in favour of the appellant Baheruddy were exhibited. The prosecution challenged these documents as forgeries. The Jury found the accused guilty and they were convicted. Complainant applied for the prosecution of the appellant Baheruddy for forgery but the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate held that the case could not proceed without sanction. Thereupon the complainant applied for sanction against the appellant Baheruddy before the learned Assistant Sessions Judge who issued notice but in the meanti...
Sukhdeodas Rekhabdas Vs. Bahadur Mull Rampuria
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-20-1924
Reported in: 78Ind.Cas.881a
1. These two appeals are directed against an order passed by the Court below under Order XXXVIII, Rule 5, Civil Procedure Code, attaching before judgment a sum of 3 lacs of rupees alleged to be due to defendant No. 1 from defendants Nos. 2 to 4. The facts of the case relevant to the present enquiry may be shortly stated thus : The defendant No 1 sold to defendants Nos. 2 to 4 (who may be shortly called the Rampurias) a certain mill called Callian Cotton Mills for Rs. 5 lacs by an Indenture dated the 21st July 1921. The mill was under mortgage to one Manik Lal Mansukbhai and the sale was subject to the mortgage. On the same day an agreement was entered into between defendant No. 1 and the Rampurias under which the Rampurias bound themselves to pay half the charge which was estimated at Rs. 3 lacs and if the amount they had to pay to the mortgagee was less than that sum, or nothing at all, they would pay to defendant No. 1 the said sum of Rs. 3 lacs or the balance thereof less the sum pa...
Romesh Ch. Basu Vs. Jadab Ch. Mitra and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-19-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Cal753
Sanderson, C.J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant from the judgment of my learned brother Mr. Justice Page.2. The defendant had acted as attorney for the plaintiffs in a suit in the High-Court in which the present plaintiffs were defendants. The present Plaintiffs succeeded in the suit, and in the appeal which was filed by the plaintiffs in that suit.3. This suit was brought by the plaintiffs to recover two sums of Rs. 245-10-3 and Rs. 3,837-1-0. The first of these sums was alleged to be the balance, due to the plaintiffs from the defendant, in respect of payments made by the plaintiffs to the defendant on account of costs after deducting the amount allowed on taxation.4. The second amount was part of a sum of Rs. 4,237-1-0, the taxed costs of the previous suit as between party and party which was paid by the plaintiffs in the previous suit to the defendant under an order of the Court as a condition for a stay of execution pending the determination of the appeal.5. In respect of thi...
Abdul Jalil and ors. Vs. the King-emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-19-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Cal996,84Ind.Cas.343
Greaves, J.1. The petitioners were convicted on the 6th June, 1923, by the District Magistrate of Chittagong under the provisions of Section 147, I.P. Code, and sentenced to varying terms of imprisonment and they were all bound down under the provisions of Section 106, Crim. Pro. Code. They appealed to the District Judge but their appeals were dismissed on the 5th September, 1923. This Rule was granted against their conviction and sentence on the 27th September 1923.2. The facts are as follows : In thana Fatikchari in the District of Chittagong, there is a hill stream called Dhurung Khal which flows from the range of hills to the north of Chittagong passing in its course through or near to the villages of Dhurung, Sundarpur and Ekkolia. The villagers of these villages had been accustomed to use the water of this stream for drinking purposes; for domestic purposes and for cultivation and also for floating down timber from the bills. The stream in the rainy season often overflowed its ba...
Kamalesh Ray and anr. Vs. Dwarika Nath Kotal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-19-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal197a,83Ind.Cas.931
1. These appeals arise out of suits brought by the plaintiffs for realization of rent from the defendants to the extent of 11-18th share on the allegation that such share was allotted to them by partition. The defence was that the plaintiffs were not entitled to recover a share of the rent as there was no separate collection. Both the Courts have found that the plaintiffs are not entitled to recover rent on the ground that a co-sharer landlord cannot sue for his own share of the rant without making the other co-sharers parties or without proving separate collection or praying for apportionment of rent. The learned vakil who appears for the appellants contends that these cases may be treated as cases for apportionment of rents. He bases his argument on the partition decree among the owners of the land in which the plaintiffs share is found to be 11-18ths. We are of opinion that we cannot convert a simple suit for rent into a suit for apportionment of rent. A suit for apportionment of re...
Gour Krishna Sarkar and anr. Vs. Nilmadhab Saha and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-19-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal498
1. The question raised in this appeal is whether on the facts found the presumption under Section 50, Bengal Tenancy Act, ought to be raised in favour of the appellants, The appellants are the tenants. The landlords opposite party brought A suit under Section 105, Bangal Tenancy Act, for enhancement of the rent of the holding in possession of the appellants. It was found by the Court of first instance that the status of the appellants was that of tenure-holders, that the holding was divided into two equal halves between the heirs of the original tenure-holder, that the rant paid in respect of each half was proportionate and that the rent had been V uniform for more than 20 years. On these ( findings it was held that the presumption under Section 50 ought to be raised in favour of the tenants that the tenancy existed from the time of the Permanent Settlement and the rent of it is not liable to enhancement. There were several other cases tried along with the present case and they were si...
Brojo Lal Banerjee Vs. Sharajubala Debi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-19-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Cal864
B.B. Ghose, J.1. This appeal is against the decision of the District Judge of Dacca, rejecting an application for probate under somewhat novel circumstances. One Kumar Ranendro Narayan Roy died on the 14th September, 1910, leaving him surviving a widow who is the respondent before us. He is alleged to have executed a will in the year 1904. Two gentlemen, Mr. Peary Lal Roy and the present appellant, were appointed executors under the said will. They made an application for probate before the District Judge of Dacca on the 4th November, 1910. The widow disputed the will, and she had applied on the Original Side of this Court for grant of Letters of Administration of her husband's estate apparently on the allegation that he had died intestate. This dispute between the parties went on for a considerable time. On the 20th September, 1912, Mr. Peary Lal Roy and the appellant before us filed an application before the Judge signed by them dated the 10th September, 1912. In that application it ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »