Kolkata Court March 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.
Sheikh Sadir and ors. Vs. Sabarali
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1925
Reported in: AIR1925Cal736
1. Under the Criminal Procedure Code now amended it is the duty of a Magistrate to proceed in accordance with the provisions of Section 139-A without waiting for the objection to be raised by one of the parties to the proceeding. Under that Section on the appearance before him of the parson against whom the order is made, the Magistrate is bound to question him as to whether he denies the existence of any public right in respect of the way, river, channel or place and if he does so the Magistrate shall before proceeding under Section 137 or Section 138 inquire into the matter. The Magistrate could not refuse to inquire into the matter because the objection was not taken until a late-stage of the case.2. We accordingly make this Rule absolute to this extent that we direct the Magistrate to follow the procedure of Section 139-A, Criminal Procedure Code before taking any further step in this matter....
Jogendra Narayan Das Vs. Satyendra Chandra Ghosh Moulik
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1925
Reported in: AIR1925Cal790,90Ind.Cas.380
Suhrawardy, J.1. The facts of this case are that the Plaintiff-Respondent brought a mortgage suit against the Defendant-Appellant on the 4th May 1922. After several adjournments the ease was fixed for hearing on the 24th July 1923. On that day the Defendant's pleader stated that he had no instruction and an ex parte preliminary decree was passed in favour of the Plaintiff. The Defendant thereafter applied for a re-hearing of the case under Order 9, Rule 13. That application was registered and the 16th February 1924, was fixed for hearing of the re-hearing case. On that date the Defendant applied for time on the ground of illness. The prayer was rejected and the re-hearing case dismissed for default. On the same day, namely the 16th February 1924, the Court on the application of the Plaintiff passed the final decree for the sale of the mortgaged properties. On the 25th February 1924 the Defendant filed an application for setting aside the order dismissing his application under Order 9, ...
Legal Remembrancer Vs. Jafar Raki
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1925
Reported in: AIR1925Cal940
1. It does not appear to be necessary for the deposition to be read over to the witness in the presence of the accused in the case of an inquiry under Section 1C7 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Under Section 177 (2) of the Code such inquiry shall be made in the manner prescribed for conducting trials and recording evidence in summons oases. The manner prescribed for recording evidence in summons oases is to be found in Section 355. Section 360 is applicable to the evidence of witnesses taken under Section 856 or Section 857, and is not applicable to a case in which the evidence is recorded under Section 355.2. We make this Rule absolute. We set aside the order of the Sessions Judge allowing the appeal, and direct that the appeal be re-heard on the merits....
Ashraf Ali and ors. Vs. Arman Khan
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1925
Reported in: AIR1926Cal162,90Ind.Cas.893
Ewart Greaves, J.1. This appeal turns on a provision for renewal contained in a lease. The lease provides for a demise for a period of nine years at a rent which is more than the rent which the landlord the raiyat, is entitled to exact from the under-raiyat under the Bengal Tenancy Act. The lease ends with this stipulation that the landlord will execute a fresh kabuliyat on the expiry of the period and the question that now arises is whether the tenant is entitled to a renewal by virtue of that provision. The two lower Courts decided that he was entitled to a renewal and Mr. Justice Newbould has agreed with their conclusion and this Letters Patent Appeal is against the decision of Mr. Justice Newbould. Now what is stated is this that it was a term of the renewal that the tenant should observe all the provisions of the lease and that inasmuch as he has declined to pay rent at the higher rate reserved in the lease and thus has broken one of the covenants he is not entitled to a renewal a...
Dhirendra Nath Roy and ors. Vs. Ahamed Mia and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1925
Reported in: 97Ind.Cas.279
Chakravarti, J.1. Plaintiffs are the appellants and this second appeal is against the judgment and decree of the Additional. District Judge of Faridpur, dated the 9th May, 1922, affirming the decision of the Munsif.2. The suit out of which this appeal arises was brought by the plaintiffs for recovery of arrears of rent in respect of a certain holding bearing a jama of Rs. 25-10-6 per year and for enhancement of rent under Section 30, Clause (6) of the Bengal Tenancy Act.3. Defendant No. 1 alone contested the suit and relied upon the entry in the Record of Rights and pleaded that under Section 50 of the Bengal Tenancy Act, he was entitled to the presumption that the tenancy was created before the Permanent Settlement and as such not liable to enhancement.4. The landlords, on the other hand, relied upon a kabuliyat executed by the predecessor of the defendants on the 9th Aswin 1301 and they contend that a new tenancy was created by it inasmuch as by this kabuliyat the landlords recognise...
Emperor Vs. Jafar Raki
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1925
Reported in: 89Ind.Cas.976
1. It does not appear to be necessary for the deposition to be read over to the witness in the presence of the accused in the cage of an inquiry under Section 107 of the Cr.P.C. Under Section 117(2) of the Code such inquiry shall be made in the manner prescribed for conducting trials and recording evidence in summons cases. The manner prescribed for recording evidence in summons cases is to be found in Section 355. Section 360 is applicable to the evidence of witnesses taken under Section 356 or 357, and is not applicable to a case in which the evidence is recorded under Section 355.2. We make this Ru]e absolute. We set aside the order of the Sessions Judge allowing the appeal, and direct that the appeal be re-heard on the merits....
Tiloke Chand Surana and anr. Vs. J.B. Beattie and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1925
Reported in: AIR1926Cal204,94Ind.Cas.538
Lancelot Sanderson, C.J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs against the judgment of my learned brother Mr. Justice Page which was delivered on the 19th of May 1924.2. The plaintiffs brought a suit against the defendant, who was sued as J. B. Beattie & Co., to recover possession of a portion of certain premises, which was occupied by the defendant. The portion in question was part of the first floor of premises Nos. 3 and 3-1, Mangoe Lane, Calcutta.3. There was a prayer for Rs. 3,160 in respect of rent up to the 31st of August 1923.4. There was a further prayer for damages at the rate of Rs. 600 per month from the 1st of September 1923 until delivery of vacant possession by reason of the alleged wrongful possession of the defendant after the 1st of September 1923.5. The defence shortly stated was that the defendant had been a tenant of these premises for a long time, and that in 1920 the defendant was requested by his landlords, Messrs. Hyam and Jones, to advance money in order that ...
ChoyenuddIn Pramanik and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1925
Reported in: AIR1928Cal271a
ORDER1. The petitioners who obtained this Rule have been convicted one of an offence punishable under Section 211, I.P.C. and the other of abetment of that offence. The first ground on which the Rule was granted was that in the original trial arising out of the complaint now found to be false the depositions were not read over in accordance with the provisions of Section 360, Criminal P.C. In the explanation submitted by the District Magistrate it is admitted that this was not done. But it is urged that this could not have vitiated the trial in the present case as the proceedings in the former case had not been used in evidence. It appears, however, from the trying Magistrate's judgment that at least one deposition was used in evidence in that case. The deposition of Basir Ex. 29 is mentioned more than once. That an omission to comply with the provisions of Section 360 Criminal P.C., is a bar to the use of the deposition as evidence was decided long ago.2. The Rule was also granted on ...
Nani Bala Sen Vs. Auckland Jute Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1925
Reported in: AIR1925Cal893
Page, J.1. In this suit I have arrived at a clear conclusion as to what my decision should be.2. The claim is brought under the Fatal Accidents Act (VIII of 1855). The deceased, one Sashi Kanta Sen, was killed by impact with a motor oar on the 1st of August; 1922, and he left behind him a young widow, two daughters, one six and the other four years of age, and two sons, one of whom was born after his death.3. The issue which I have to determine is whether Sashi's death was caused by the wrongful act, neglect, or default of the defendant's chauffeur, who, admittedly was driving the car at) the time when Sashi was striken down.4. In all suits in which issues of fact are involved regard ought to be had to the manner in which the witnesses on the one side and on the other give their evidence, and in my opinion, in no class of cases is it more important that attention should be paid to the bearing of the witnesses than in cases such as the one which has just been tried. If I accept the evid...
Manik Vs. King Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1925
Reported in: AIR1925Cal933
1. No one appears to oppose this Rule. It appears that at the hearing of the case before the committing Magistrate though the depositions of the witnesses were read over to them as, required by Section 360, Criminal Procedure, Code but this was done while the other witnesses were being examined. This we have held is not sufficient compliance with the provisions of Section 360, Criminal Procedure Code, since the object of that section is that the accused may have the opportunity of ascertaining that the evidence has been correctly recorded. This is of great importance in an enquiry with a view to commitment, since under certain circumstances the evidence then taken may be used as evidence against him at the trial. The objection was taken in the Sessions Court before the accused was called in to plead. Under these circumstances we think we shall make the rule absolute, and we accordingly quash the commitment of the petitioner and direct that the case be reheard before the committing Magi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »