Kolkata Court January 1925 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.
W.H. Thomas Vs. Mrs. Thomas and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-13-1925
Reported in: AIR1925Cal585
Sanderson, C.J.1. In this case we are of opinion that the matter must be remanded to the learned District Judge on the ground that in our opinion the judgment of the learned Judge is not sufficient.2. In the first place there is nothing in the learned Judge's judgment to show that the case comes within the provisions of Section 2 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869. That section provides that 'Nothing hereinafter contained shall authorise any Court to grant any relief under this Act, except in cases where the Petitioner professes the Christian religion and resides in India at the time of presenting the petition.' There is no finding as to the matters referred to therein. The section further provides ' or to make decrees of dissolution of marriage except in the following cases (a) where the marriage shall have been solemnized in India; or (b) where the adultery complained of shall have been committed in India.'3. All that the learned Judge says in his judgment is as follows:-'I am satisfied...
NabIn Chandra Saha Poddar and ors. Vs. Dudu Mia and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-13-1925
Reported in: AIR1925Cal1193,87Ind.Cas.767
Mukerji, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for rent instituted by the plaintiffs for the years 1323 to 1326, the allegation being that the defendants were holding under a kabuliyat executed by their predecessor in-interest for dwelling purposes in the year 1281. The Court of first instance decreed the plaintiffs' suit. The lower appellate Court gave the plaintiffs a decree for the amount of rent claimed for the years in suit together with interest at the rate of 12 per cent. per annum, the rate of interest stipulated in the kabuliyat being 75 per cent. per annum at which the suit had been decreed by the Court of first instance. The plaintiffs appeal to this Court, and their contention is that the decision of the lower appellate Court on the question of interest is wrong. It appears that the ground upon which the rate of interest was objected to in the Court of first instance on behalf of the defendants was that it was penal and unconscionable. The learned Munsif held that according...
NuruddIn Ahmed, Receiver Vs. Subodh Chandra Mitra
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-13-1925
Reported in: AIR1925Cal1174,87Ind.Cas.808
1. This is an appeal by a Receiver appointed in Suit No. 930 of 1911 instituted on the Original Side of this Court. The suits was one for administration and partition, and the order appointing the Receiver was in the usual form. On the 31st January 1917 an order was passed by the Original Side of this Court giving liberty to the appellant to sell certain of the premises of which he had been appointed Receiver, namely 203, Lower Circular Road, for the purpose of paying off the mortgage that existed on the property. I understand that since the date of that order the mortgage referred to in the order of the 31st January 1917 has been paid off. Subsequent to the appointment of the Receiver the parties who were interested in the properties mortgaged their interest in those properties to the respondent before us. The mortgagee under that mortgage commenced a suit in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of the 24-Parganas to enforce his Mortgage, and apparently having heard that the Receiver wa...
Chandra Mohan Talukdar Vs. Shaikh Elim
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-13-1925
Reported in: 87Ind.Cas.512
Mukerji, J.1. This appeal, which has been preferred by the plaintiff, arises out of a suit in which the plaintiff claimed paddy-rent from the defendant and the defendant contended that the rent that he had to pay was not paddy-rent but money-rent at Rs. 2. per year. The suit was decreed by the Court of first instance and that decree has been upheld by the lower Appellate Court.2. Two points that have been urged on behalf of the appellant : Firstly, that the learned Subordinate Judge in arriving at his finding on the question as to whether the rent that was payable for the holding was paddy-rent or rent at Rs. 2 per year, as alleged on behalf of the parties, relied on a recital contained in a document Ex. 3 which is not admissible in evidence as against the present plaintiff; and secondly, that in arriving at the said finding the learned Judge has omitted to take into consideration the evidence that there is on the record relating to the payment of produce rent by the defendant to the p...
Radha Krishna Marwari Vs. Sarbeswar Nag and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-1925
Reported in: AIR1925Cal684a
Suhrawardy, J.1. Plaintiff No. 1 along with his lessee plaintiff No. 2 brought this suit for establishment of title and recovery of possession of a plot of land alleging dispossession by the defendants in 1918. Plaintiff's claim is based on a lease from the alleged owners of the land Makhan Ray and Ananta Ray, dated 14th Ealgun, 1306. The defendants resist the plaintiff's claim by virtue of a lease, dated 14th Chaitra, 1306, from defendants Nos. 2 and 3 to whom they assert the land in suit belongs. They further deny plaintiff's possession within the statutory period and also claim title by adverse possession. On these pleadings two principal issues were raised as to title and limitation. In the trial Court the learned Munsif found both the issues against the plaintiffs and dismissed the suit, On appeal by the plaintiffs the learned Subordinate Judge set aside the decision of the trial Court and decreed the suit. Hence this appeal by the defendants. It is admitted that none of the parti...
Bhuban Mohan Ghose Vs. Co-operative Hindusthan Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-1925
Reported in: AIR1925Cal973
Sanderson, C.J.1. This is a cross-objection filed under Order 41, Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure by Srimati Susila Bala Dasi who is the wife of Bhuban Mohan Ghose.2. The suit was brought against Surendra Nath Pramanio and Bhuban Mohan Ghose carrying on business under the name, style and firm of ' Eastern Trading and Engineering Co.' The third defendant was Srimati Susila Bala Dasi, and the fourth was Priag Das Jamuna Das, who alleged to be puisne mortgagees. One of the allegations of the plaintiff Bank was that premises No. 56, Amherst Bow had been mortgaged to the plaintiffs by deposit of the title deed as additional security for the amount owing to the Bank on an account called 'O' which the defendants Nos. 1 and 2 had with the Bank.3. Bhuban Mohan Ghose and his wife Susila Bala Dasi alleged in their written, statements that these premises belonged to Susila; on the other hand, the plaintiffs alleged that Susila was merely the benamidar of defendants Nos. 1 and 2.4. The learn...
Radha Kishan Marwari Vs. Sarbeswar Nag and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-1925
Reported in: 86Ind.Cas.674
Suhrawardy, J.1. Plaintiff No. 1 along with his lessee plaintiff No. 2 brought this suit for establishment of title to and recovery of possession of a plot of land alleging dispossession by the defendants in 1918. Plaintiffs' claim is based on a lease from the alleged owners of the land Makhan Roy and Ananta Roy dated 14th Falgun 1306. The defendants resist the plaintiffs' claim by virtue of a lease dated 14th Chaitra 1306 from defendants Nos. 2 and 3 to whom they assert the land in suit belongs: They further deny plaintiffs possession within the statutory period and also claim title by adverse possession. On these pleadings two principal issues were raised as to title and limitation. In the Trial Court the learned Munsif found both the issues against the plaintiffs and dismissed the suit. On appeal by the plaintiffs the learned Subordinate Judge set aside the decision of the Trial Court and decreed the suit. Hence this appeal by the defendants. It is admitted that none of the parties ...
Surendra Nath Chaudhury Vs. Lakshan Chandra Ray Chaudhury and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-1925
Reported in: AIR1926Cal213,87Ind.Cas.744
Cuming, J.1. This appeal arises out of a certain proceeding in execution. A certain property putni Lat Jogeshwardihi has been sold in execution of a decree for rent. One of the judgment-debtors objected to the sale on the ground that the property had been bought at the sale in the benami of another judgment-debtor. The Trial Court held that the purchase of the property was made by Surendra Nath Chaudhury'in the benami of his brother-in-law Jotindra Prosad Ray Chaudhury who was one of the judgment-debtors and, therefore, under the provisions of Section 173, Bengal Tenancy Act, set aside the sale.2. The auction-purchaser has appealed to this Court. The objecting judgment-debtor has raised the preliminary objection that no appeal lies against an order passed under Section 173, Bengal Tenancy Act. This contention appears to us to be well-founded. Admittedly the sale took place under the provisions of the Bengal Tenancy Act and the order setting aside the sale was passed under Section 173, ...
J.C. Das Vs. the Cachar Native Joint Stock Company, Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-1925
Reported in: 87Ind.Cas.764
1. This is a Rule obtained at the instance of one of the defendants in the suit with regard to an order that was made by the Subordinate Judge directing certain accounts to be taken by a Commissioner appointed in the suit. The suit was commenced so long ago, I think, as the year 1920 by the Company against certain of its officers including the auditor seeking to make them liable for certain loss which had been incurred by the Company which, it is alleged is owing to the defalcation of some of the officers of the Company.2. The claim against the auditor at whose instance this Rule was obtained was for a specific sum of some Rs. 69,000 and before all this was established a reference was made by the Subordinate Judge to a Commissioner directing certain accounts to be taken preliminary to the hearing of the suit. The order in the form in which it; had been made by the District Judge was ' admittedly too wide and an application with regard thereto was made before Mr. Justice Chakravarti and...
J.C. Das Vs. Cachar Native Joint Stock Company Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-1925
Reported in: AIR1926Cal349
1. This is a Rule obtained at the instance of one of the defendants in the suit with regard to an order that was made by the Subordinate Judge directing certain accounts to be taken by a Commissioner appointed in the suit. The suit was commenced so long ago I think as the year. 1920, by the Company against certain of its officers including the auditor seeking to make them liable for certain loss which had been incurred by the Company which, it is alleged, is owing to the defalcation of some of the officers of the Company.2. The claim against the auditor at whose instance this Rule was obtained was for a specific sum of some Rs. 69,000, and before all this was established a reference was made by the Subordinate Judge to a Commissioner directing certain accounts to be taken preliminary to the hearing of the suit. The order in the form in which it had been made by the District Judge was admittedly too wide and an application with regard thereto was made before Mr. Justice Chakravarti and ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »