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.
Surja NaraIn Bera and ors. Vs. Chandra Bera and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-10-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Cal1050,84Ind.Cas.467
Suhrawardy, J.1. This is an appeal against an order of remand made by the Subordinate Judge of Midnapur, dated the 21st February, 1923. The plaintiffs brought the suit for a declaration of their right to fill up a hollow in their own land, and to construct a chatal or pavement thereon, and for compensation from the defendants for damages caused to the said pavement. The defendants stated that plaintiffs, by constructing the pavement, had obstructed the flow of water to which they and the residents of 5 other villages had a right of easement. One of the pleas raised in bar was that the suit was bad for defect of parties, as all the persons interested, namely, the residents of the five villages previously referred to had not been made parties to the suit.2. The Court of first instance gave effect to this plea and dismissed the plaintiffs' suit. On appeal the learned Subordinate Judge remanded the case, being of opinion that the said persons were not necessary parties to the suit.3. The d...
Khajeh SalaluddIn and ors. Vs. Mt. Afzal Begum and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-10-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal23
1. On the 24th February, 1909 one Mt. Jahura Begum obtained a decree for Rs. 25,000 and costs against her two minor children and her minor step-son. On the 8th October, 1920 an application was made to this Court on the Original Side for an order that the certified copy of this decree together with a certificate of non satisfaction be transmitted to the Court of the District Judge of Dacca for execution. This application was made by one Afzal Begum who alleged that she was the assignee of the decree. On the 7th May 1920 the Master on the Original side of this Court transferred the decree to the Dacca Court for execution. With the copy of the decree was forwarded a certificate signed by a Judge of this Court under Order XXI, Rule 6. The District Judge of Dacca transferred the execution case to the Subordinate Judge, 1st Court. On the 2nd December 1921 an application for execution of this decree was filed in that Court and that is execution case No. 120 of 1920. In that application three ...
Kherodamoyi Dasi Vs. Habib Shaha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-10-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal152
Suhrawardy, J.1. The only question involved in this appeal is whether the suit was maintainable in view of the fact that the Plaintiff bad not brought on the record the heir of one of the mortgagors.2. The suit was for the enforcement of a mortgage bond executed by Defendant No. 1 and one Moiboo Sah who died before the date of institution of the suit. The suit was brought against the Defendant No. 1. and one Abirjan Bibi who was described as the widow and heir of the deceased mortgagor Moiboo Sah. It subsequently transpired that the name of the widow was cot Abirjan Bibi but Asiran Bibi. The first Court held that there was a bona fide mistake on the part of the Plaintiff in giving the name of the widow as Abirjan and decreed the Plaintiff's suit. On appeal the learned Subordinate Judge held that before instituting the suit the Plaintiff was aware that the name of Moiboo's widow was Asiran and not Abirjan and that she had intentionally for Borne purpose, known to her described her, as A...
Hariram Mahata Vs. Mahesh Chandra Mahata
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-10-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal169
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff against the judgment and decree of the District Judge of Midnapore reversing the judgment and decree of the Munsif, 2nd Court, Midnapore, and arises out of a suit for the recovery of the money in lieu of paddy on a mortgage bond. The defendant (now respondent) admitted execution of the mortgage-bond but plead-ed that it had been satisfied by the execution of a subsequent bond (Exhibit A) on the 30th Baisakh 1323 corresponding to the 13th May 1916. The trial Court disbelieved the story of payment. On appeal the District Judge held that the bond in suit had been satisfied and discharged by the execution of the second bond and accordingly allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit with costs.2. The plaintiff has now filed this second appeal. In our opinion the matter is concluded by the finding of fact arrived at by the first appellate Court. The learned District Judge has found that the bond in suit was satisfied and discharged by the second bond. Tha...
Khajah SalauddIn and ors. Vs. Musammat Afzal Begum and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-10-1924
Reported in: 84Ind.Cas.68
1. On the 24th February 1909 one Musammat Jahura Begum obtained a decree for Rs. 25,000 and costs against her two minor children and her minor step-son. On the 8th October 1920 an application was made to this Court on the Original Side for an order that the certified copy of this decree together with a certificate of non-satisfaction be transmitted to the Court of the District Judge of Dacca for execution. This application was made by one Afzal Begum who alleged that she was the assignee of the decree. On the 7th May 1920 the Master on the Original Side of this Court transferred the decree to the Dacca Court for execution. With the copy of the decree was forwarded a certificate signed by a Judge of this Court under Order XXI, Rule 6. The District Judge of Dacca transferred the execution case to the Subordinate Judge, First Court. On the 2nd December 1921 an application for execution of this decree was filed in that Court and that is Execution Case No. 120 of 1920. In that application t...
Srimati Khiradamoyi Dasi Vs. Habib Shaha and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-10-1924
Reported in: 82Ind.Cas.638
Suhrawardy, J.1. The only question involved in this appeal is whether the suit was maintainable in view of the fact that the plaintiff had not brought on the record the heir of one of the mortgagors.2. The suit was for the enforcement of a mortgage-bond executed by defendant No. 1 and one Moiboo Shah who died before the date of institution of the suit. The suit was brought against the defendant No. 1 and one Abirjan Bibi who was described as the widow and heir of the deceased mortgagor Moiboo Shah. It subsequently transpired that the name of the widow was not Abirjan Bibi but Asiran Bibi. The first Court held that there was a bona fide mistake on the part of the plaintiff in giving the name of the widow as Abirjan and decreed the plaintiff's suit. On appeal the learned Subordinate Judge held that before instituting the suit the plaintiff was aware that the name of Moiboo's widow was Asiran and not Abirjan and that she had intentionally for some purpose known to her described her as Abi...
Gangamani Biswas and ors. Vs. Rabja Ali Chaukidar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-09-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal106,84Ind.Cas.145
1. This appeal is by the plaintiffs and arises out of a suit for possession of certain land by avoiding an encumbrance under Section 167 of the Bengal Tenancy Act. The whole question depends upon the fact whether the suit in execution of the decree under which, the plaintiffs purchased the property was a rent suit coming within the provisions of Section 148-A of the Bengal Tenancy Act so as to bring into operation all the rights which a purchaser obtains at a sale in execution of a rent decree under that Act.2. We have been lead through the plaint in the rent suit the material portion of which is contained in paragraphs 4 and 6. In paragraph 4 the plaint stated that the rent in arrears due to the plaintiffs alone, who were co-sharer landlords was a certain amount and it also stated that the tenant defendant's dues to the co sharer defendant's Nos. 2 to 5 for the period in suit may amount to a certain amount. In paragraph 6 it was stated that on account of information having been withhe...
Gangamani Biswas Vs. Rabja Ali Chaukidar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-09-1924
Reported in: (1924)ILR51Cal935
Newbould and Ghose, JJ.1. This appeal is by the plaintiffs and arises out of a suit for possession of certain land by avoiding an encumbrance under Section 167 of the Bengal Tenancy Act. The whole question depends upon the fact whether the suit in execution of the decree under which the plaintiffs purchased the property was a rent suit coming within the provisions of Section 148A of the Bengal Tenancy Act so as to Ming into operation all the rights which a purchaser obtains at a sale in execution of a rent decree under that Act.2. We have been led through the plaint in the rent suit the material portion of which is contained in paragraphs 4 and 6. In paragraph 4 the plaint stated that the rent in arrears due to the plaintiffs alone, who were co-sharer landlords was a certain amount and it also stated that the tenant defendants' dues to the co-sharer defendants Nos. 2 to 5 for the period in suit may amount to a certain amount. In paragraph 6 it was stated that on account of information ...
Debrani Debya Vs. Kumar Sarat Kumar Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-08-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Cal791
Mookerjee, J.1. The facts which have given rise to the present Rule shortly stated are these. The petitioner is the purchaser of a certain holding in respect of which there was subsequently a decree for rent against the petitioner's vendor inasmuch as the petitioner had not got her name registered in the zamindar's sheristha. In execution of that decree for rent the holding was sold in auction. The petitioner's case is that, in order to get the sale set aside, she made over the amount recoverable under the decree together with costs and other expenses to the judgment-debtor in order that the same might be deposited in Court for payment to the decree-holder and the auction-purchaser in accordance with the provisions of Section 174 of the Bengal Tenancy Act and that this deposit was duly made by the judgment-debtor himself; but that subsequently the judgment-bebtor put in a petition stating that he had nothing to do with the deposit and, in consequence, the application to set aside the s...
Sarat Chandra Chakravarti and Atul Chandra Moitra Vs. Tarak Chandra Ch ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-08-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Cal982
1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by four persons as plaintiffs against defendants Nos. 1 to 5 who are stated to be acting as Directors of the Company which was joined as defendant No. 6 on the ground that one of the plaintiffs has been prevented from acting as Director. The facts shortly stated are that at a meeting of the share-holders of the Company which was held on the 32nd Ashar 1329 the plaintiff No. 2 and defendants 1, 2 and 3 were elected Directors. The meeting was subsequently adjourned and the adjourned meeting was held on the 7th Sraban following. On that date on account of certain proceedings which we need not state in detail the election of the Directors held on the previous date was reconsidered and a new election took place the result of which was that defendants 1, 2, 3 and 4 were elected directors and plaintiff No. 2 was not elected. There was also some other alteration as regards the election of the Assistant Managing Director. Several issues were framed, b...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »