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.
Sarada Sundari Basu Vs. Akramannessa Khatun and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-18-1924
Reported in: 78Ind.Cas.747
1. This Rule was obtaintd on grounds Nos. 4 and 6 of the patition which are as follows:2. For that on a valid and correct construction of law on the subject the learned Subordinate Judge ought to have held that the suit was beyond the peouniary jurisdiction of the learned Munsif.For that the learned Munsif having heard all the evidence and arrived at his own finding thereon, the learned Subordinate Judge has erred in law and aobed without jurisdiction in not expressing his definite conclusions thereupon.3. The suit was one for redemption and the Munsif before whom it was instituted proceeded by way of a preliminary issue to decide the question whether he had the pecuniary jurisdiction to try it. Evidenoe was led on both sides and upon it he came to the , conclusion that the debt due by plaintiff to defendant was over Rs. 1,000 and that, consequently, the suit was beyond his jurisdiction. He accordingly returned the plaint for presentation to the proper Court. Plaintiffs appealed and th...
Kalia Alias Kala Gazi Alias Abdul Mali and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-18-1924
Reported in: 85Ind.Cas.723
1. The five appellants before us were tried before a Jury of five persons and they were convicted of offences under the provisions of Sections 395 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code. Two Jurors were in favour of their acquittal and three Jurors were in favour of their conviction and the learned Officiating Additional Sessions Judge agreed with the verdict of the majority of the Jury and sentenced the first three appellants to five years rigorous imprisonment under Section 395 and the other two appellants to seven years under Section 397. Now the charge has been, attacked in seven particulars. First of all, it is said that the learned Judge was wrong in referring the Jury to Ex. 3 and admitting it in. evidence because it is urged before us that it is inadmissible in evidence under the provisions of Section 172 of the Cr.P.C. and it is said that it could only be used 'for the purpose of contradicting the Police Officer, who wrote the diary and for no other purpose whatsoever. The second po...
In Re: Alliance Bank of Simla, Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-15-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Cal818,84Ind.Cas.1018
Sanderson, C.J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment of my learned brother Mr. Justice Greaves which was given in respect of an application made by the Liquidators of the Alliance Bank of Simla, Ltd., which was filed on the 20th of August 1923.2. It appears that on the 27th of April 1923 the Bank had suspended payment. It subsequently went into voluntary liquidation, and the Petitioners were appointed Liquidators.3. The question in this case arises in connection with a claim of the employees of the Bank, who were members of a Provident Fund, established by the Bank in 1892 for the benefit of its employees. The Petitioners asked for the direction of the Court as to -The manner in which they were to deal with claims made by such members, that is to say, whether such members were entitled to receive payment in full of the amounts of the said credit balances in priority to the unsecured creditors and the share-holders of the said Bank or whether such members were entitled only to rank par...
Re Alliance Bank of Simla, Ltd. Peter Donald Macpherson Vs. Dugald Mck ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-15-1924
Reported in: 84Ind.Cas.14
Lancelot Sanderson, C.J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment of my learned brother Mr. Justice Greaves which was given in respect of an application made by the Liquidators of the Alliance Bank of Simla, Ltd., which was filed on the 20th of August 1923.2. It appears that on the 27th of April 1923 the Bank had suspended payment. It subsequently went into voluntary liquidation, and the petitioners were appointed Liquidators.3. The question in this case arises in connection with a claim of the employees of the Bank, who were members of a Provident Fund, established by the Bank in 1892 for the benefit of its employees. The petitioners asked for the direction of the Court as to 'the manner in which they were to deal with claims made by such members, that is to say, whether such members were entitled to receive payment in full of the amounts of the said credit balances in priority to the unsecured creditors and the share-holders of the said Bank or whether such members were entitled, only t...
Nripendra Kumar Dutta Vs. Chairman of Habigunj Municipalty
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-15-1924
Reported in: 85Ind.Cas.533
1. The facts giving rise to the suit out of which this appeal has arisen are that there is a market within the Municipality of Habigunj called Purahbazar. The appellant is the Receiver of an estate called the masulia estate which, owns a small fractional share in the market. This market, as alleged by the plaintiff, is an old one. Chi. the 'other hand the defendants say that the sale of fish and vegetables has been started in this market lately. For the purposes of this appeal it is not necessary for us to enquire whether the market is old or new. The plaintiff applied to the defendant Municipality for as license under Section 339 of the Bengal Municipal Act III of 1884 to use the market for the sale of fish and vegetables; but license was refused.' On the 29th March 1920, the Commissioners of the Municipality resolved that they did not see their way to grant the license to the plaintiff who was a part-proprietor. By this resolution they intended to convey that the plaintiff had no rig...
Mathurapur Zemindary Co. Ltd. Vs. Bhasaram Mandal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Cal661
Mukerji, J.1. The facts which have given rise to this appeal are quite simple.2. On the 4th February, 1920, Mr. G. Hennessy and others obtained a decree for rent against the respondents the appellants, the Mathurapur Zemindary Co., Ld., on the 17th July, 1920, applied for execution of the said decree after being substituted in the place of the decree-holders on the basis of certain assignments in respect of the decree-holders' properties alleged to have been made in the first instance in September, 1919, and thereafter in January, 1920. The learned Munsif in whose Court the said application was made issued notice on the judgment-debtors to show cause why the substitution should not be made. The judgment-debtors appeared, denied that there was any assignment of the decree in question, and challenged the locus standi of the appellants to get themselves substituted or proceed with the execution. The learned Munsif held that the appellants were not transferees of the decree either by assig...
Baseruddi Sheikh Vs. King-emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Cal776,83Ind.Cas.528
1. The accused in this case has been convicted under the provisions of Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code and he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years. One point only is made with regard to the charge and it is this. It is said that the learned Judge neglected to charge the jury with regard to the rights of the accused under the provisions of Section 103 of the Indian Penal Code. Now we have read the charge, and although the Judge has directed the jury with regard to the right of private defence of the body under Section 102, we cannot find that there was any direction to the jury with regard to the right of the accused under Section 103, if the jury accepted the defence put forward on behalf of the accused, namely, that he awoke and found the dead man coming from inside the hut. If the deceased man came to the house with the intention of robbery and if he came from inside the hut as was the story put forward for the defence, the learned Judg...
KalimuddIn Ahamed Vs. EsabakuddIn and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Cal830
Walmsley, J.1. The circumstances which have led up to the present appeal are as follows. A partition suit was instituted on December 20, 1918, against several defendants, among whom the present appellant was No. 4. Two of the defendants contested the suit, and on September 22, 1919 a preliminary decree for partition was made on contest against two of the defendants and ex parte against the others. The present appellant did not appear at all in the first Court, and he is one of those against whom the decree was made ex-parte. On December 17, 1919 the first defendant alone preferred an appeal against the decree, to this Court, and three days later, on December 20, the appellant presented an application to the trial Court under Order IX, Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Code. This application was kept pending until after the disposal of the appeal preferred by the first defendant.2. The fate of that appeal was this. One of the respondents died, and as the appellant did not take proper steps...
(Moulvi) Ahidannabi Vs. Nagendra Lal Gangopadhya and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal302
1. This appeal arises out of it suit brought by the plaintiffs for recovery of possession of three plots of land on declaration of their title thereto the plots being 169/1551, 169 and 136. With regard to the first plot, the Court of first instance held that they had right to, that land but that right was extinguished by limitation. On appeal the learned Subordinate Judge has found that the plaintiffs were able to prove their possession within 12 years of the suit and has given the plaintiffs a decree in respect of that plot. The present appeal in respect of that plot has not been pressed and we do not think that on the findings come to by the lower Appellate Court we are entitled to interfere with that portion of the judgment. As regards plot No. 169 the learned Munsiff found that it did not belong to the plaintiff's jote and dismissed the plaintiff's suit. On appeal, the learned Subordinate Judge has given the plaintiffs a decree and hence the appeal by the defendants. The finding of...
Sheikh Abdul and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal581
1. The three accused before us have been convicted by a unanimous verdict of a Jury. The first accused has been sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 364 and accused Nos. 2 and 3 to seven years' rigorous imprisonment each under Section 120-B read with Section 364. They were convicted under other sections to which I shall presently refer but no separate sentence has been passed in respect of the convictions under the other sections. Now the accused were all charged originally with offences under Section 120-B and with rioting under Section 147. They were further charged under Section 302 and also under Section 364 read with Section 34 that is to say, with abduction for the purpose of murder. Accused No. 1 was further charged under Section 302 read with Section 34 and accused No. 3 was further charged under Section 323, The Jury unanimously found all the accused not guilty under Section 120-B read with Section 302 and also not guilty under Section 302 read with Sect...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »