Kolkata Court May 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.
Gosta Behari Pramanik and ors. Vs. Hem Chandra Das De (Hem Chandra Das ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-28-1924
Reported in: 82Ind.Cas.315
1. This appeal is from the judgment of the District Judge of Murshidabad. The appellant is the plaintiff in a rent suit, the respondent No. 1 being the tenant and No. 2 a co-sharer landlord. The suit related to an occupancy holding governed by the terms of a kabuliyat executed in 1875. In 1911 four bighas odd was acquired for railway purposes under the Land Acquisition Act, and the compensation money, some Rs. 470, was paid over to the tenant. In 1919 this suit was brought for the rent, for the years 1322 to 1325. The defendant claimed abatement and also pleaded certain payments. The first Court gave effect to both pleas and made a decree in part. The learned District Judge dismissed the appeal. Before us various points have been taken in argument which were not touched in the Courts below. It is argued first of all that having regard to the terms of the kabuliyat no question of abatement can arise at all, because it is expressly provided against. The terms are as follows according to ...
Eshaque Sheikh and ors. Vs. Matilal Malo and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-28-1924
Reported in: 81Ind.Cas.1043
Suhrawardy, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for rent. The defendant No. 1 who is the appellant, gave a permanent lease to the plaintiff and the plaintiff granted a barga lease for one year of the land to the defendant No. 1. The defendant No. 1 held over and the present suit is for rent for the years 1322 to 1325. The defence was that the defendant No. 1 was a raiyat and that the lease granted by him was in Contravention of Section 85, Bengal Tenancy Act. The plaintiffs, therefore, had no interest in the land and was not entitled to-receive any rent. The Munsif gave effect to these, pleas and fin ding that notice under Section 49, Bengal Tenancy Act, was proved to have been served upon the plaintiff dismissed the suit. On appeal the learned Additional District Judge has decreed the plaintiff's suit. The learned Judge, first raised two principal points: (1) 'Is the patta granted by the defendant to the plaintiff' and pro forma defendant No. 2 void under Section 85, Bengal Tenancy ...
Rogers Pratt Shellac Co. Vs. Secretary of State for India in Council
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-28-1924
Reported in: 83Ind.Cas.273
N.R. Chatterjea, J.1. This is a case stated by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Bengal, under the provisions of Section 66 of Act XI of 1922 and Section 51 of Act VII of 1918.2. The Rogers Pratt Shellac Company is incorporated in the United States of America with its head quarters in the city of New York. The Company have a branch office in Calcutta to buy gum shellac and other Indian products, and a factory at Wyendhamgunj in the United Provinces. No sales are conducted in India by the Company: their transactions are limited to the purchase of shellac and other goods, some of which are purchased on account of a certain Gramophone Company which pay the Company a fixed percentage on the purchase: plus expense, while the balance is sold in the open market.3. Income tax was assessed for the year 1921-22 as also supertax, and the tax was paid under protest on the 6th May, 1922.4. They were similarly assessed for the year 1922-23, and the tax was paid on the 29th March 1923 with a notice tha...
Charn Chandra Ghosh Vs. Rai Behari Lal Mitra Bahadur
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-28-1924
Reported in: 80Ind.Cas.931
1. This Rule is issued against an order of the District Judge of Barisal reversing an order of the Subordinate Judge of that place setting aside a sale under Order XXI, Rule 90, Civil Procedure Code. The learned Subordinate Judge had held that there were suppression of sale processes and other material irregularities and set aside the sale accordingly. The learned District Judge on appeal proceeded upon one single point, namely, the absence of proof of service of notice on the decree-holder. It may be remarked that in this case the decree-holder was the auction purchaser. The learned District Judge has found that there was no proof of service of notice of the application on the decree-holder which is necessary to entitle a Court to pass an order under Rule 90 and in this view of the matter dismissed the petitioner's application for setting aside the sale. This rule was obtained on the ground that the view taken by the Court below was wrong and that he bad no jurisdiction to dismiss the...
Chowthmull Manganmull Vs. the Calcutta Wheat and Seeds Association
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-27-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal416,84Ind.Cas.922
Sanderson, C.J.1. This is an application by the plaintiffs-respondents that the appeal should be dismissed and that an order should be made directing the Registrar to pay to the attorneys for the plaintiff-respondents the sum of Rs. 21,850, and any interest that may have accumulated.2. It appears that the plaintiffs obtained a decree for that sum on the Original Side of this Court.3. An appeal was preferred by the defendants Chowthmull Manganmull to this Court, and, an application was made for stay of execution. A consent order was made on the 29th of August, 1923, in these terms: 'By consent the execution 'will be stayed pending the hearing of 'the appeal upon the defendant-appellant 'paying into Court, the decretal amount 'with interest, the total being twenty-one 'thousand eight hundred and fifty, on or 'before the 14th of September, 1923. If 'the money is not be paid, the stay will be removed. The plaintiff-respondent 'will be at liberty to take out the money, 'if so deposited, on ...
Chowthmull Maganmull Vs. the Calcutta Wheat and Seeds Association
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-27-1924
Reported in: (1924)ILR51Cal1010
Sanderson, C.J.1. This is an application by the plaintiff respondents that the appeal should be dismissed and that an order should be made directing the Registrar to pay to the attorneys for the plaintiff respondents the sum of Rs. 21,850, and any interest that may have accumulated.2. It appears that the plaintiffs obtained a decree for that sum on the Original Side of this Court.3. An appeal was preferred by the defendants Chowthmull Maganmull to this Court: and, an application was made for stay of execution. A consent order was made on the 29th of August 1923 in these terms: 'By consent the execution will be stayed pending the hearing of the appeal upon the defendant appellant paying into Court, the decretal amount with interest, the total being twenty one thousand eight hundred and fifty, on or before the 14th of September 1923. If the money is not so paid, the stay will be removed The plaintiff respondent will be at liberty to take out the money, if so deposited, on giving security...
Promotha Nath Mullick Vs. Secretary of State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-22-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Cal1036a
Pearson, J.1. In these applications it is sought to set aside an order of the Land Acquisition Judge refusing to enter upon an enquiry as to the area and measurement of the land acquired.2. The declaration was published in August, 1920,and objections were put in by the claimant before the Collector in January, 1921. In April, 1921, the claimant filed a petition, after the Collector had made his award, asking for a reference to the Judge, upon the specific ground 'for determination of the proper compensation and valuation for the lands acquired.' The reference was made accordingly. In April, 1924i the petitioner put in a further application before the Judge raising an objection as to the area of the land acquired and asking that either Government should fee called upon to admit the area, or a local enquiry should be held. This application was refused by the learned Judge, and thereupon the present Rules were obtained.3. It has been contended on behalf of the -applicant that once a refer...
Satya Bhupal Banerjea Vs. Rajnandini Debi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-22-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Cal1069,83Ind.Cas.144
Greaves, J.1. These are three appeals by the defendant against a decision of the District Judge of Hughly, modifying a decision of the 2nd Subordinate Judge. The suits were for rent in respect of two putnis is held by the defendant in two separate moujas. Appeal No. 863 relates to a putni in mouja Samnarainpur ana Appeals Nos. 1218 and 1219 relate to a putni in the other mouja. The suits were brought to recover an 8 annas share of the rent. Under the putni the rent was payable in ten monthly kists, the last kists being payable in the month of Magh. On the 22ad Falgun 1326 there was a partition between the co-sharers as a result of which the whole proprietary interest passed to the defendant, and the plaintiff's claim for rent is resisted with regard to a period of one month and seven days of the year 1326, because the defendant contends that it is not right that he should not receive rent for seven days of Palgoon and for the month of Chait inasmuch as he was the proprietor during this...
Sarat Chandra Ghose and ors. Vs. Raj Kumar Chakravarty and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-22-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal334
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Additional Subordinate Judge of Backergunj confirming an order of the Munsiff, Second Court, Patukhali, dismissing an application for setting aside a sale.2. The only point which has been urged before us on behalf of the appellant is that inasmuch as the decree-holders, did not obtain the previous sanction of the District Judge to execute the decree against the Common Manager, the sale held in execution thereof was a nullity, it being con-tended that the powers of a Common Manager are analogous to those of a Receiver and that the same procedure applies. This argument was advanced in the Courts below and was, we think, rightly rejected. Ss.93 to 100 of the Bengal Tenancy Act relate to the appointment of Common Manager, and there is no provision which requires the previous sanction of the District Judge to be obtained to bring a suit for rent against a Common Manager or to execute a decree obtained in such suit. If it had been the in...
Nana Mia Vs. Manu Mia
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-22-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal392,82Ind.Cas.830
Mukerji, J.1. Plaintiff sued upon a khata for recovery of Rs. 294 made up of principal Rs. 100 and interest at the rate of 6 1/4 per cent per mensem. Defendant repudiated the execution of the khata entry and denied the loan.2. The entry in the khata shows a stipulation to pay interest at 6 1/4 per cent without mentioning whether it was per mensem or per annum. Defendant in several places in his written statement adverted to the plaintiff's allegation in the plaint of the stipulated rate of interest being per month but did not controvert it specifially or plead its excessive or unconscionable character, beyond denying the transaction in toto. Paragraph 5 of the written statement, however, when translated runs thus: 'The stipulation mentioned in the plaint is illegal and no claim for interest is sustainable on the basis of the same. It is exceedingly improbable and unnatural to borrow money at the rate of 6i per cent per mensem for the purposes of business; and if such a transaction ever...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »