Kolkata Court June 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.
Radha Kissen Chamaria Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-16-1924
Reported in: (1924)ILR51Cal1030,84Ind.Cas.941
Newbould and Ghose, JJ.1. This is an appeal against the conviction of the appellant of an offence punishable under Section 84 of the Calcutta Port Act. The appeal has been argued before us solely on a point of law, and we have not been taken through the judgment or told what are the actual facts of the case. It is assumed in the argument that the accused has erected or fixed something in contravention of Section 83 which prohibits the making, erecting or fixing below high water mark within the Port of Calcutta any wharf quay, stage, etc., without the consent of the Local Government. The only point urged on behalf of the appellant is that if this section be read with Clause (5) of Section 2 of the Act, no offence has been committed. This clause provides--nothing herein contained shall deprive any person of any right of property or other private right except as hereinafter expressly provided.' This clause seems really to be unnecessary, since no statute can abrogate private rights except...
In Re: Goods of Kumar Guru Prosad Sinha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-16-1924
Reported in: 87Ind.Cas.534
Page, J.1. This case is of great importance to those who are concerned in propounding the Will. It is also of interest to the medical community, because it illustrates the pitfalls which lie in the path of professional men who through carelessness or complaisance stray from the straight way marked out for their progress by the traditions of a great profession. The Will in suit is propounded by one Lila the sole executrix and the residuary legatee. The contesting caveator is the Ram Krishna Mission; the Kumar's daughter, Princess. Lukshmi, claiming only that the Will be proved in solemn form. About 3 or 4 p. m. on the 21st November 1920 the testator, commonly known as the Raja of Khaira, is alleged to have made the Will, the validity of which is challenged in these proceedings. About 1 a. m. on the 22nd November 1920 Kumar Guru Prosad Sinha was seized with an attack of delirium tremens of so violent a nature that he threatened to kill Lila with whom he had been living, and to whom, a fe...
Sasi Kanta Acharjee Bahadur Vs. Genda Sheikh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-11-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal389
Chakravarty, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff and arises out of a suit brought by him for recovery of arrears of rent at a rate which was agreed between the parties by a registered kabuliyat dated the 23rd of May, 1.916. The facts which are necessary for the determination of this appeal are as follows: One Samir the predecessor of the defendants was by a right of inheritance entitled to one-fifth share of an occupancy holding. He purchased also a non-transferable occupancy holding which belonged to somebody else. He approached his landlord and prayed for sub-division of his ancestral holding and also for recognition of his right as a purchaser of the occupancy holding which he had bought. It seems that the parties agreed and the result of that agreement was the kabuliyat which I have already mentioned. By that kabuliyat the one-fifth share which Samir inherited was amalgamated with the land ho had purchased and a new holding was created at a rental of Rs. 15-7-0. In arriving at ...
Maharaja Sasi Kanta Acharjee Bahadur Vs. Genda Sheikh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-11-1924
Reported in: 82Ind.Cas.970
Chakravarty, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff and arises out of a suit brought by him for recovery of arrears of rent at a rate which was agreed between the parties by a registered kabuliyat dated the 23rd of May 1916. The facts which are necessary for the determination of this appeal are as follows. One Samir the predecessor of the defendants was by a right of inheritance entitled to one-fifth share of an occupancy holding. He purchased also a non-transferable occupancy holding which belonged to somebody else. He approached his landlord and prayed for sub-division of his ancestral holding and also for recognition of his right as a purchaser of the occupancy holding which he had bought. It seems that the parties agreed and the result of that agreement was the kabuliyat which I have already mentioned. By that kabuliyat the one-fifth share which Samir inherited was amalgamated with the land he had purchased and a new holding was created at a rental of Rs. 15-7-0. In arriving at th...
Sabdi Bepari and ors. Vs. Sheikh Budhai
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal370
Chakravarti, J.1. This is an appeal by defendants Nos. 1 to 3 and arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff' for a declaration that certain lands appertain to his jote from which he was wrongfully dispossessed by the defendants. The plaintiff further alleged that he was already a tenant under the landlords of the land of dag No. 11 and that the landlords during the Re-cord-of-Rights included a portion of his jote within dag No. 1 of the Record-of-Rights which was recorded as khas patit. The plaintiff further alleged that although he had an existing tenancy right to a portion of the lands now in dispute he was obliged in order to avoid a dispute with the landlords to take a fresh settlement from the landlords and that an amaldari was granted by the landlords in 1322 B.S.2. The defence of defendant No. 1 was that all these lands formed part of the zemindar's khas patit recorded in dag No. 1 and that he took settlement from the landlords in 1324, and that, therefore, the lands apperta...
Sheikh Sabdi Bepari and ors. Vs. Sheikh Budhai
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1924
Reported in: 82Ind.Cas.949
Chakravarti, J.1. This is an appeal by defendants Nos. 1 to 3 and arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff for a declaration that certain lands appertain to his jote from which he was wrongfully dispossessed by the defendants. The plaintiff further alleged that he was already a tenant under the land lords of the land of dag No. 11 and that the landlords during the Record of Rights included a portion of his jote within dag No. 1 of the Record of Rights which was recorded as khan patit. The plaintiff further alleged that although he had an existing tenancy right to a portion of the lands now in dispute he was obliged in order to avoid a dispute with the landlords to take a fresh settlement from the landlords and that an amaldari was granted by the landlords in 1322 B.S.2. The defence of defendant No. 1 was that all these lands formed part of the zemindars khas patit recorded in dag No. 1 and that he took settlement from the landlords in 1324, and that, therefore, the lands appertain...
MofizuddIn Chowdhury and anr. Vs. Rajendra Nath Sanyal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-09-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal208,84Ind.Cas.989
Greaves, J.1. These six appeals have bean dealt with together and they were preferred against decisions of the District Judge of Dinajpur reversing decisions of the Munsif of Balurghat. All these appeals were dealt with by one judgment in the lower Appellate Court. The suits out of which these appeals arise were suits for enhancement of rent. They were brought at the instance of the landlords who claimed enhancement under the provisions of Section 30, Sub-section A.B., B.T. Act. At the hearing the claim under Sub-section A was abandoned and only that under Sub-section B was pressed. The first Court decreed two of the suits granting enhancement at the rate of 5 annas in the rupee. The other four suits were dismissed on the ground that the defendants were tenure holders and that they hold the lands at fixed rates. The lower Appellate Court decreed all the six suits granting enhancement at 3 annas in the rupee and negatived the decision of the Munsif that the defendants were tenure-holder...
Abdul Hakim Khan Chaudhuri Vs. Elahi Baksha Sha and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-09-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Cal309,85Ind.Cas.103
Chakravarti, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs and the question raised in this appeal is whether upon the facts found by the lower Appellate Court, the presumption that the tenancy is a permanent one is correct in law. The Munsiff held that the presumption did not arise but the Subordinate Judge has held that it did. The fact shortly stated are these:2. Plaintiffs are the owners of a kaimi mokurarijote and the land in suit is a piece of bantu land situated within the Municipality of the town of Rajshahye and was let out to Golab Saha, the father of the defendant, above 44 or 45 years ago, by the mother of the plaintiffs apparently for dwelling purposes. Plaintiffs served a notice to quit on the defendants and after the expiry of the term bring this suit for khas possession of the lands, giving the defendants the option to remove the houses standing thereon, which, the plaintiffs allege, are of an unsubstantial character.3. The defence of the defendants inter alia was to quote th...
Abdul Hakim Khan Chowdhury Vs. Elahi Baksha Saha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-09-1924
Reported in: (1925)ILR52Cal43
Chakravarti, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs and the question raised in this appeal is whether upon the facts found by the lower Appellate Court, the presumption, that the tenancy is a permanent one, is correct in law. The Munsif held that the presumption did not arise but the Subordinate Judge has held that it did. The facts shortly stated are these:Plaintiffs are the owners of a kaimi mokarari jote and the land in suit is a piece of bastu land situated within the municipality of the town of Rajshahi and was let out to Golab Saha, the father of the defendant, about 44 or 45 years ago by the mother of the plaintiffs, apparently for dwelling purposes-Plaintiffs served a notice to quit on the defendants-and after the expiry of the term brings this suit for khas possession of the lands, giving the defendants the-option to remove the houses standing thereon, which the plaintiffs allege are of an unsubstantial character.The defence of the defendants inter alia was to-quote the word...
Emperor Vs. Probhat Chandra Barua
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-08-1924
Reported in: (1924)ILR51Cal504
Rankin, J.1. This is a Reference made by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Assam, under Section 66 Sub-section (2) of the Indian Income Tax Act (XI of 1922) for the opinion of the Court. The question for determination is stated thus:Whether the following classes of income derived from permanently settled estates are liable to income.(2) income from fisheries.(2) Income from land used for stacking timber.(3) Income from pasturage.2. The question as regards income from pasturage is not now in dispute, and I agree with the Commissioner and the learned Vakil who appears for the Crown in thinking it to be reasonably plain that income from pasturage is 'derived from land which is used for agricultural purposes', and is, therefore, in the case of a permanently settled estate, within the exemption given by Section 4 Sub-section (3) Clause (viii) of the Act to 'agricultural income' as defined by Section 2 Sub-section (1) Clause (a). In the circumstance that such income is derived from fees realis...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »