Kolkata Court October 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.
Ram Saran Das and ors. Vs. Maulu and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-30-1925
Reported in: 96Ind.Cas.541
Zafar Ali, J.1. This is an appeal against a judgment of my learned brother Mr. Justice Chakravarti by which he modified the decision of the Subordinate Judge. The facts relevant to the present appeal may be shortly stated thus. The plaintiffs allege that the defendant's predecessor was granted a lease of a piece of land as a homestead in about 1850, that the predecessors of the defendant and after them the defendant have been in possession since then and, the plaintiffs served upon the defendant a proper notice to quit and on that the tenancy has terminated. The plaintiffs, therefore, brought the suit for the purpose of ejecting the defendant from the land.2. The defendant raised several objections, but the plea which it is now necessary to state was that the defendant had taken in the year 1916 a certain piece of agricultural land in the same village from some other landlord which he had been holding as a raiyat. He, therefore, claimed that his tenancy with regard to this homestead sh...
Keramat Mandal and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-28-1925
Reported in: 92Ind.Cas.453
1. This case See 92 Ind. Cas. 439 : 27 Cr. L.J. 263--[Ed.] came up once previously before this Court on which occasion the conviction of the appellants was set aside and the case sent back for re-trial on the ground of erroneous admission of inadmissible evidence. The Court gave also certain directions as regard the framing of charges on the re-trial. On this occasion also the appellants have been convicted on the unanimous verdict of the Jury under Section 366 and 376, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to ten years rigorous imprisonment, each under each section, the sentences to run concurrently.2. On behalf of the appellants it has been contended by their learned Vakil that the present trial has also been vitiated on account of the use made by the Sessions Judge of the statements made by witnesses to the Police Officer during the course of investigation under Ch. XIV, Cr. P.C., in contravention of Section 162 of the Code. The learned Judge was of opinion that he was entitled to put qu...
Surendra Nath Ghose and ors. Vs. King-emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-15-1925
Reported in: AIR1926Cal161
1. Under the provisions of Section 421, Code of Criminal Procedure, the appellate Court has the power to dismiss an appeal summarily on receiving the petition and perusing the same. But, in this case, the learned Judge sent for the record and after the arrival of the record it appears that he did not give the appellant an opportunity of being heard. We think that under Section 421, Code of Criminal Procedure the appellant was entitled to be heard in support of his appeal. Under these circumstances, the order dismissing the appeal is set aside and the learned Judge is directed to give the appellant an opportunity of being heard in support of his appeal....
Lalit Kumar Sen Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-15-1925
Reported in: AIR1926Cal174,92Ind.Cas.894
1. After the record was sent for and received, the learned Sessions Judge ought to have heard the Pleader and ought not to have dismissed the appeal summarily without hearing him. The order dismissing the appeal summarily is accordingly set aside and the appeal is sent back to him to be re-heard according to law....
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›