Kolkata Court April 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.
Srimati Kumudini Dasi, Widow of Girish Chandra Mitra Vs. Srimati Suren ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-17-1924
Reported in: 82Ind.Cas.22
Walmsley, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the defendant, and it relates to a small strip of land measuring about ten kattas. The plaintiff's case is that she and defendant No. 3 are owners of an estate No. 165 of the Hooghly Collectorate, immediately to the east of some railway 'B' class land, and that the land in suit lies within their estate and not in the 'B' class land, that the land was in possession of their tenants, defendants Nos. 4 to 10, but the first and second defendants have entered on the land, and cut trees, dug a tank and built a privy and established a bazar. On those allegations she claimed khas possession. 2. The suit was resisted by the second defendant, who asserted that the land was really situated in the 'B' class land of which he is the owner. The first Court found that the land was in the plaintiff's estate and gave her a decree for possession through the tenants along with her co-partner, the defendant No. 3.3. The second defendant appealed and the plaintiff ...
Satya Ranjan Roy Choudhry and anr. Vs. Sarat Chandra Biswas
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-17-1924
Reported in: 96Ind.Cas.695
Chakravarti, J.1. this is a second appeal by defendants Nos. 2 and 3, and it arises out of a suit which the plaintiff brought on a hand-note executed by one Lalit Mohan Bhuttacharya.2. After the institution of the suit Lalit Mohan died. The plaintiff brought in on the record as the legal representative of. Lalit Mohan not only defendant No. 1, the widow of Lalit Mohan and admittedly his legal representative, but also added defendants Nos. 2 and 3 on the ground, to quote the words of the learned Subordinate Judge that 'on his (Lalit Mohan's) death the defendants Nos. 2 and 3 appropriated some bricks of the kiln' which belonged to Lalit Mohan. The learned Subordinate Judge further found that defendants Nos. 2 and 3 took away those bricks under the orders of the District Board of Nadia.3. The Subordinate Judge held that the claim was valid, and made a decree not only against the widow as representing the estate of Lalit Mohan but also against defendants Nos. 2 and 3 as the legal represent...
Rajani Kanta Saha and anr. Vs. Rajendra Kumar Bose and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-17-1924
Reported in: 82Ind.Cas.663
Lancelot Sanderson C.J.1. This is an appeal by defendants Nos. 1 and 2 from a judgment of the Second Additional District Judge of Dacca, dated the 14th of July 1922.2. The judgment of the lower Appellate Court dealt with two Suits Nos. 305 and 321. The plaintiff alleged that the first and the second defendants had by erection of a building encroached beyond the land which the plaintiff had settled with them.3. It appears that the defendants had a building in the Srinagar Bazar, that the building was blown down in the Cyclone of 1919. Thereupon, defendants Nos, 1 and 2 erected a new building and it is in respect of this building that the plaintiff alleged the encroachment, and two suits were brought and, it was alleged that two plots of lam belonging to the plaintiff had beer encroached upon.4. Suit No. 305 referred to the alleged encroachment on the West, and suit No. 321 related to the alleged encroachment on the South and the East.5. The learned Munsif who tried three suits dismissed...
Prohlad Chandra Das and ors. Vs. Biswa Nath Bera
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-17-1924
Reported in: 82Ind.Cas.411
Suhrawardy, J.1. The appeal arises out of a suit for accounts and is directed against an order of remand made by the learned Additional District Judge of Midnapur.2. The facts of the case have been shortly stated as follows in the judgment of the Court of first instance: This is a suit for accounts The plaintiff's case is that the defendant No. 1 was gomastha under the pro forma defendant No. 2 in Mouzas. Barkola and Mirzapore and that he executed a security kabuliyat for his work in favour of the pro forma defendant on the 7th Kartik 1306 A.S. mortgaging the plaint schedule properties and on the strength of that kabuliyat he did the gomashta work from Kartik 1306 to Magh 1327 A.S., that on the 5th Falgun 1327 A.S., the pro forma defendant No. 2 sold off to plaintiff all his rights in the two mouzas together with his rights to get accounts and papers from defendant No. 1 and to recover from him the sums due thereon by a registered kobala taking due an proper consideration thereof; that...
Kumar Gopika Raman Roy Vs. Atal Singh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-17-1924
Reported in: 85Ind.Cas.678
Newbould, J.1. The plaintiff Kumar Gopika Raman, Bay who is the appellant before us, sued for khas possession of a large area of land about 20 square miles in village Patharkandy in the Karimgung Sub-Division of the District of Sylhet. He claimed the land as appertaining to permanently settled Estate No. 85 of the Sylhet Collectorate of which, he owns a 1/7th share. In Schedule I of the plaint the lands of Mouza Patharkandy in Estate No. 85 are described. Schedule II specifies the lands which were allotted to this 1/7th share by an amicable partition between the predecessor-in-interest. the Maharaja of Manipur and his co-sharers. In Schedules III and IV ale set out certain lands which though parts of the land of Schedule II are not included in the claim of the present suit. The lands' of Schedule III were acquired by Government under the Land Acquisition Act. The land of Schedule IV was the subject of the previous suit in which the plaintiff a father obtained a decree for khas possessi...
Dwarkadas Haridas Vs. Amba Lal Ganpatram
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Cal893
Greaves, J.1. One Shantilal Lajjashankar, the Secretary of a Limited Company carrying on business at Ahmedabad in the Bombay Presidency presented a petition of complaint in, I think, February or March last before the Deputy Inspector-General of Police of the Poona Criminal Investigation Department of the Bombay Presidency against Dwarkadas Haridas of Calcutta. Ambalal Ganpatram an Inspector of Police of the C.I.D., Poona, was directed by the Deputy Inspector-General of Police, C.I.D., Poona to get the case registered at Ahmedabad and to investigate into the matter, Ambalal Ganpatram had the complaint recorded in the Police Station of Kalupur in Ahmedabad city and took up the investigation. The complaint was filed by the complainant as representative of the limited company and on its behalf. The complaint alleged that Dwarkadas had been acting since 1920 as commission agent of the limited company, and that as such, he was entrusted with yarn and cloth bales belonging to the company for ...
Jolfa Bibi Vs. AjaladdIn and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal425,85Ind.Cas.1053
Mukherji, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for partition instituted by the plaintiff Jolfa Bibi to have her 3 as. 11-12/27 p. share in the lands of Schedule I and 10 as. 2 p. share in the lands of Schedule II of the plaint after partition by metes and bounds.2. The plaintiff's case was that one Pela Gazi left 3 sons, Baksha Ali, Kamar Ali and Safar Ali, that Baksha Ali predeceased his two brothers, that defendants Nos. 1 to 8 are the descendants of Baksha Ali and Kamar Ali, that Safar Ali left a son Nijamat Ali, that Nijamat Ali died leaving a widow named Sabjan, a daughter (viz., the plaintiff) and a son who subsequently died leaving a widow, the defendant No. 9 and a daughter, the defendant No. 10, and that last of all Sabjan died. According to the plaintiff the lands of Schedule I were owned by Pela Gazi, and those of Schedule II belonged to Nijamat Ali. Defendants Nos. 11 to 26 are said to have purchased portions of the lands from some of the aforesaid defendants.3. Of the def...
Abdus Sakoor and anr. Vs. Abdul Rahim and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal1106
1. This appeal arises out of a suit under Section 92 of the Civil P.C. in respect of a Muhammadan endowment.2. The plaintiffs who are certain Muhammadan residents of Howrah brought a suit on the allegations that a lady of the name of Asurannessa Bibi, on the 27th September 1881 executed a wakf-nama dedicating certain immovable properties by way of wakf and appointing one Haji Talebullah as mutwalli; that subsequently the said mutwalli having mismanaged the properties and misappropriated the income thereof, she executed a deed of towliatnama on the 16th September 1887, whereby she removed the son of Talebullah from the mutwalliship, (Talebullah having died in the meantime) and took up the management in her own hands, that about three years afterwards, on the 24th August 1890, she executed another deed by which she appointed the defendant as mutwalli, laid down certain rules for the management of the properties and for succession la the office of mutwalli and that the defendants had been...
Dwarkadas Haridas Vs. Mr. Ambalal Ganpatram
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-1924
Reported in: 82Ind.Cas.131
Greaves, J.1. One Shantilal Lajjashankar, the Secretary of a limited Company carrying on business, at Ahmedabad in the Bombay Presidency, presented a petition of complaint in, I think, February or March last before the Deputy Inspector-General of Police of the Poona Criminal Investigation Department of the Bombay Presidency against Dwarkadas Haridas of Calcutta. Ambalal Ganpatram, an Inspector of Police the C.I.D., Poona, was directed by the Deputy Inspector-General of Police, C.I.D., Poona, to get the case registered at Ahmedabad and to investigate into the matter. Ambalal. Ganpatram had the complaint recorded in the Police Station of Kalupur in Ahmedabad City and took up the investigation. The complaint was filed by the complainant as representative of the limited Company and on its behalf. The complaint alleged that Dwarkadas had been acting since 1920 as commission agent of the limited Company and that as such he was entrusted with yarn and cloth bales belonging to the Company for ...
Sheikh Abdus Shakoor and anr. Vs. Munshi Abdul Rahim and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-1924
Reported in: 86Ind.Cas.799
1. This appeal arises out of a suit under Section 92 of the C.P.C. in respect of a Muhammadan endowment.2. The plaintiffs who are certain Muhammadan residents of Howrah brought a suit on the allegations that a lady of the name of Asurannessa Bibi on the 27th September 1881 executed a wakfnama dedicating certain immoveable properties by way of wakf and appointing one Haji Talebullah as mutwalli, that subsequently the said mutwalli having mismanaged the properties and misappropriated the income thereof, she executed a deed of towliatnama on the 16th September 1887 whereby she removed the son of Talebullah from the mutwalliship,(Talebulla having died in the meantime) and took up the management in her own hands, that about, three years afterwards, on the 24th August 1890, she executed another deed by which she appointed the defendant as mutwalli, laid down certain rules for the management of the properties and for succession in the office of mutwalli and that the defendants had been misman...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »