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.
Satish Chandra Bhattacharjee Vs. Sri Jogunnessa Bibi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-12-1924
Reported in: 78Ind.Cas.958
Mukerji, J.1. The facts which have given rise to the present application are these.2. One Umedali applied under Order XXI, Rule 90, Civil Procedure Code, in the Court of the 6th Munsif at Comilla for setting aside a sale, and during the pendenoy of the said proceedings died on the 18th July 1920. On the 24th July 1920 the death was reported to the Court, and the learned Munsif made a note of it in the order-sheet. Thereafter, on five different dates, the proceedings were adjourned on the ground that the heirs had not been made parties and six months had not yet elapsed from the date of death. On the 5th February 1921, one of the dates to which the case was adjourned, an application for substitution was made on behalf of the heirs and legal representatives of Umedali and the same was allowed. It does not appear whether the opposite party were present on that date or not, but on none of the dates to which the case was subsequently adjourned, was any objection taken to the order for subst...
Jogunnessa Bibi Vs. Satish Chandra Bhattacharji
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-12-1924
Reported in: (1924)ILR51Cal690
Mukerji, J.1. The facts which have given rise to the present application are these.2. One Umed Ali applied under Order XXI, Rule 90, Civil Procedure Code, in the Court of the 6th Mansif at Comilla for setting aside a sale, and during the pendency of the said proceedings died on the 18th July, 1920. On the 21th July, 1920, the death was reported to the Court, and the learned Munsif made a note of it in the order-sheet. Thereafter on five different dates the proceedings were adjourned, on the ground that the heirs had not been made parties and six months had not yet elapsed from the date of death. On the 5th February, 1921, one of the dates to which the case was adjourned, an application for substitution was made on behalf of the heirs and legal representatives of Umed Ali and the same was allowed. It does not appear whether the opposite party were present on that date or not, but on none of the dates to which the case was subsequently adjourned, was any objection taken to the order for ...
Debi Prosad Bhakat Vs. Nagendra Kumar Nag and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-12-1924
Reported in: 78Ind.Cas.727
Walmsley, J.1. This appeal is directed against an order setting aside a sale under the provisions of Order XXI, Rule 90 of the Civil Procedure Code.2. The circumstances are as follows : The landlord obtained a decree for arrears of rent in respect of a patni against five brothers and the widow of a sixth. The decree was for a sum of rather more than Rs. 12,000 with costs in addition. On June 22nd, 1921 the decree-holder applied for execution of the decree by the sale of the patni tenure and the Court ordered notices to be issued under Order XXI, Rule 66, and fixed the case for July 12th. On that date the decree-holder filed an affidavit to the effect that these notices had been duly served. At the same time, he asked that by way of precaution registered post-cards should be sent to the judgment-debtors, as none of them had entered appearance. The Court ordered this step to be taken and the case was adjourned for a week. On July 19th decree-holder filed and affidavit to the effect that ...
Subasini Devi Vs. Ashutosh Lahiri
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Cal751,84Ind.Cas.372
1. The plaintiff brought a suit in 1921 against the petitioner in the Cot it of the Munsiff at Howrah for recovery of possession of a piece of land. After hard contest that suit was dismissed by the Munsiff on the 23rd January, 1922. The plaintiff thereupon preferred an appeal and on the 28th July, 1923, filed an application under Order 23, Rule 1 on the following allegation, viz., 'there are some mistakes and defects in the plaint and some necessary words are wanting, there is the chance of this being disadvantageous to the decision of the case. If the case is conducted, there is likelihood of injury being done to me. Therefore it is humbly prayed that order may be passed allowing me to withdraw the original suit with permission to bring a fresh suit,' On this application the learned Judge passes the following order : 'The appellant is allowed on his prayer to withdraw from the suit with leave to sue again if the claim be not time barred. Appellant to pay the costs of the respondent o...
Ram Sundar Ram Vs. Ram Charit Bhakat
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Cal827,(1924)ILR51Cal663,79Ind.Cas.326
Walmsley, J.1. One Ganpat Ram was adjudicated insolvent by an order of the District Judge of Dinajpur on January 12, 1920. The nazir of the Court was then appointed Receiver of the insolvent's estate.2. In April, a creditor, Syed Muhammad Musa Choudhuri (No. 8), and in the following January, another creditor, Ram Charit, now respondent, asked the Judge to take proceedings in regard to a conveyance executed by the insolvent in favour of the appellant, Ram Sundar Ram, shortly before the insolvent sought the refuge of the Court. The Judge held an enquiry and annulled the conveyance.3. The transferee prefers this appeal and his principal contention is that the proceedings were incompetent because they were conducted by a creditor or creditors and not by the Receiver. It appears to me beyond doubt that it is the Receiver and only the Receiver who should conduct such proceedings. The course that is to be taken is clearly described in the case of Joy Chandra Das v. Mahomed Amir (1917) 22 C.W....
Bachai Kalwar Vs. Jamuna Kalwarin
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-08-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal339
1. On the merits this Rule clearly cannot succeed. The Honorary Presidency Magistrate has directed the petitioner Bachai Kulwar to pay Rs. 50 a month for the maintenance of his wife. It appears that the petitioner is living with a mistress and that he refused to allow ids wife to live with him. She is perfectly willing to do so and she asks that she may be allowed to live, if not with her husband, at any rate in a house near his. The husband does not accede to this, but offers a two alternatives (1) to live with his brother in their native village at Jaunpur, (2) to live with her mother at Arsian. Bo far as the living with his brother is concerned upon the facts placed before the Magistrate the offer is clearly an unreason-aide one, for the wife alleges and the Magistrate accepts her story that when she was previously living with his brother, she was ill-treated by him.2. The second alternative is also clearly unreasonable for it appears that the wife's mother lives the greater part of...
Manmatha Nath Chowdhury and ors. Vs. Nalinaksha Rai and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-08-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal423
1. The plaintiff brought a suit for rent against the defendants in respect of a piece of homestead land in the town of Burdwan in which the defendant had a permanent transferable right. The defence was that the relationship of landlord and tenant between the plaintiff's and defendant was extinguished by the defendants transferring the leasehold interest to one Jnandayini before the rent sued for had accrued. The Court of first instance found that it was a heritable and transferable lease and that the defendant had transferred it to Jnandayini before the period in suit; but it being of opinion that in spite of the transfer the defendants were liable for rent to the plaintiffs, decreed the suit. On appeal, the learned Subordinate Judge reversed the decision of the first Court on the ground that under the lease the plaintiffs were bound to recognise the transferee of the defendants and hence they could not claim rent from them after the transfer of the lease to Jnandayini. The present app...
Tarini Kumar Dutta and ors. Vs. Srish Chandra Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-08-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal1160,85Ind.Cas.667
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for specific performance of a contact for sale of certain immovable property belonging to a minor, the defendant No. 1 in the suit. The contract was entered into by his guardian one Ratikanta Saha who is the natural father of the minor defendant. The minor was given in adoption by his father and, therefore, under the law he has no further connexion with the minor after the adoption. He was, however, appointed guardian, under the Guardians and Wards Act, of the properties of the minor. The Defendants Nos. 2 to 6 had subsequently purchased the property with the sanction of the District Judge in the name of Defendant No. 7. There was some question in the Court below as to whether Defendant No. 7 was the benamidar for Defendants Nos. 2 to 6. It has been so found by the Subordinate Judge and that finding has not been questioned before us. The Subordinate Judge made a decree in favour of the plaintiff varying to some extent the contrast upon which the plai...
Sundermull Poreshram Vs. Tribhuban Hirachand and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-08-1924
Reported in: (1924)ILR51Cal657
Buckland, J.1. This is a suit to set aside an award of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce made on the 19th January 1922.2. The parties on the 14th April 1920, entered into a contract whereby the plaintiffs sold and the defendants bought white Java sugar.3. The contract contains, among others, an arbitration clause in the following terms:Any disputes to be settled by arbitrations under the rules of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce, or, at the option of the sellers by the arbitration of two European sugar importers of Calcutta, one to be appointed by the sellers and one by the buyers, with powers to appoint a European merchant as Umpire. The decision of the Chamber, Arbitrators or Umpire shall be final and binding on both parties either of whom may make the same a rule or order of Court. If the buyers shall fail to join in such arbitrations or to appoint an arbitrator within three days after being required to do so, the arbitration may, at the option of sellers, proceed ex parte and the award ...
Shebaits of Idol Srridhar JIn Thakur Manmatha Nath Chowdhury and ors. ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-08-1924
Reported in: 79Ind.Cas.557
1. The plaintiff brought a suit for rent against the defendants in respect of a piece of homestead land in the town of Burdwan in which the defendant had a permanent transferable right. The defence was that the relationship of landlord and tenant between the plaintiffs and defendants was extinguished by the defendants transferring the leasehold interest to one Jnandayini before the rent sued for had accrued. The Court of first instance found that it was a heritable and transferable lease and that the defendant had transferred it to Jnandayini before the period in suit; but it being of opinion that in spite of the transfer the defendants were liable for rent to the plaintiffs, decreed the suit. On appeal, the learned Subordinate Judge reversed the decision of the first Court on the ground that under the lease the plaintiffs were bound to recognise the transferee of the defendants and hence they could not claim rent from them after the transfer of the lease to Jnandayini. The present app...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »