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.
Boroda Prosad Roy Choudhri Vs. Foijuddi Halder and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-01-1924
Reported in: 83Ind.Cas.384
1. These three Rules were obtained by the landlord who has obtained decrees for rent and put them into execution. Applications were made by purchasers of portions of the holdings for deposit of the decretal amount under section. 170 (3) of the Bengal Tenancy Act. The decree-holder objected that the applicants had no right to make the deposit under the provisions of that section. The learned Munsif overruled the objection of the decree-holder and directed that the applicants were entitled to make the deposit under the law.2. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the interest of the applicants in the holdings is not voidable on the sale and, therefore, they were not entitled to make the deposit. It is not denied before us that the applicants have an interest in the holdings which are sought to be sold in execution of the rent-decree. But the contention is that the interest of the applicants would pass by the sale and it is not such an interest as should be considered as 'voida...
Legal Remembrancer Vs. Satish Chandra Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-01-1924
Reported in: (1924)ILR51Cal924
Graham, J.1. This is an appeal by the Government of Bengal under Section 417, Criminal Procedure Code, against the order of the Subdivisional Magistrate of Balurghat in the district of Dinajpur acquitting one Satish Chandra Roy, an Assistant Police Sub-Inspector, and four others on a charge of extortion under Section 384, Indian Penal Code.2. The case for the prosecution was shortly as follows:3. A dacoity had taken place in the neighbouring village of Gangarampur, in which one Asharuddin, a servant of the complainant Alamdi Mahalat, had been sent up by the Police. On the evening of the 16th March 1923, the live accused came to the house, where the complainant lived with his uncle Oli Mahalat and the latter's mother Pathali, for the ostensible purpose of searching the house for stolen property, their real object however being to extort money, and the Assistant Sub-Inspector threatened not only to search the house but to tie up with a rope and challan the complainant and other occupants...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›