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.
Badiar Rahaman Vs. Sarada Kanta Datta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1925
Reported in: AIR1925Cal1103
Chakravarthi, J.1. This Rule in my opinion is concluded by the judgments in the case of Jogindra Nath Chatterjee v. Monmotho Nath Ghose [1912] 18 C.L.J. 566. No doubt in later cases, notably in the case of Dhirendra Nath Roy v. Kamini Kumar Pal A.I.R 1924 Cal. 786, it has been pointed out that an attaching creditor after he has obtained his decree is a person, who comes within the purview of the amended words of Rule 90, Order 21, Code of Civil Procedure. This later case, however, distinguishes the case of Jogendra v. Monmotho [1912] 18 C.L.J. 566 and in no way touches the authority of the earlier case. In this state of the authorities I am bound to follow the case of Jogendra Nath Chatterjee v. Monmotho Nath Ghose [1912] 18 C.L.J. 566. That being so, this Rule fails and must be discharged.2. In the circumstances, I make do order as to costs....
Nani Bala Sen Vs. Auckland Jute Co., Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1925
Reported in: (1925)ILR52Cal602
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 car 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 stricken 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 case 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 evide...
Jatindra Nath Roy Chowdhury Vs. Narayan Das Khettry
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1925
Reported in: (1925)ILR52Cal862
Walmsley, J.1. The appellants are the defendants, the successors in interest of Satyendra Nath Roy Chowdhury, who was the proprietor of a khasmahal holding. This holding was sold under the Revenue Sales Law by the Collector on December 17, 1919y and bought by the plaintiff. Satyendra's efforts to have the sale set aside were fruitless and on July 6r 1920, a certificate was issued to the plaintiff saying that his purchase took effect from May 1, 1920. Then on August 2,1920, a declaration was made under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act in respect of the holding and on March 11, 1921, the Deputy Collector awarded Rs. 2,181 for the land, and Rs. 12,888 for the building standing on it. This building was admittedly erected at the expense of Satyendra and it was standing on the land at the time of plaintiff's purchase. The suit was brought to determine whether the plaintiff or defendants were to take the compensation money. There is of course no question about the compensation for t...
Rai Harendra Nath Chaudhury Vs. Sona Gazi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1925
Reported in: AIR1926Cal259,90Ind.Cas.504
Ewart Greaves, J.1. We think that this Rule should be made absolute. The facts of the case are as follows: A decree was obtained ex parte in the Second Court of the Munsif at Khulna on behalf of certain co-sharers. The decree was executed at the instance of one of the co-sharers alone and the standing crops of the judgment-debtor were attached. The other co-sharer on coming to hear of the execution applied for being made and was made an executing decree-holder. Then apparently the other co-sharer arrived at a compromise with the judgment-debtor whereby the execution case was dismissed on certain terms. The petitioner who obtained the Rule objected to the compromise which involved the dismissal of the execution case and he, accordingly applied for a review on the ground of fraud. The review was granted which involved the rehearing of the execution case. Against the grant of the review an appeal was preferred and on appeal the order granting the review was set aside and the compromise ar...
Jatindra Nath Roy Chowdhury and ors. Vs. Narayan Das Khetry
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1925
Reported in: AIR1926Cal97,90Ind.Cas.901
Hugh Walmsley, J.1. The appellants are the defendants, the successors-in-interest of Satyendra Nath Roy Chowdhury, who was the proprietor of a khas mahal holding. This holding was sold under the Revenue Sales Law by the Collector on December 17, 1919, and bought by the plaintiff. Satyendra's efforts to have the sale set aside were fruitless and on July 6, 1920, a certificate was issued to the plaintiff saying that his purchase took effect from May 1, 1920. Then on August 2, 1920, a declaration was made under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act in respect of the holding and on March 11, 1921, the Deputy Collector awarded Rs. 2,181 for the land, and Rs. 12,388 for the building standing on it. This building was admittedly erected at the expense of Satyendra, and it was standing on the land at the time of plaintiff's purchase. The suit was brought to determine whether the plaintiff or defendants were to take the compensation money. There is, of course, no question about the compensa...
Upendra Mohan Roy Choudhri Vs. Narendra Mohan Roy Choudhri and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1925
Reported in: AIR1926Cal155
Greaves, J.1. This is an appeal from an order of the District Judge of Khulna dated the 23rd September 1924, whereby he found that the appellant before us was of unsound mind and incapable of managing his affairs. The learned District Judge came to this conclusion upon the evidence of the Civil Surgeon of Khulna which was to the effect that the appellant was not in a sound condition and that he was suffering from a great deficiency of memory and from general weakening of mental faculties and this witness further states that he put many questions to the appellant and he could not in all cases give rational answers; and he further states that he came to the conclusion at which he arrived because he found great deficiency of memory and general weakening of mental faculties, and he states the various questions that he put to the appellant in the course of his examination. It appears that the appellant was under the observation of this gentleman for a considerable period and that he examine...
Panchanon Sarkar and ors. Vs. Basanta Kumari Dasi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-11-1925
Reported in: AIR1925Cal1230
Cuming, J.1. The facts of this appeal are as follows:The plaintiff in the suit) sued for recovery of possession of certain chur lands. His case was that the land in dispute formed part of his zamindari mauza Arara. The land has been washed away some time after the revenue survey and from the year 1310 (October 1903) began to re-form and the plaintiff took possession and remained in possession through a tenant This tenant's holding was sold in execution of a decree for rent and purchased by the plaintiff. When he went to take possession in 1318 (1911) he was resisted by the defendants. Hence the suit which was instituted on the 6th October 1915. The defence was that the land in suit appertained to the defendants' mauza chur Lankar, that the plaintiff never possessed than lands. The land bad re-formed 30 years before the date of suit and the defendants had acquired a title by adverse possession.2. The trial Court found that the suit was barred by limitation. The plaintiff had failed to p...
Hon'ble Maharaja Sir Manindra Chandra Nandi Bahadur Vs. Bhagabati Devi ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-11-1925
Reported in: 90Ind.Cas.986
Suhrawardy, J.1. The present suit was brought by several persons for declaration of title to and recovery of possession of, the disputed land which is said to be on the boundary between the plaintiff's and the defendant's mouzas. The real issue in the case that was tried was whether the disputed land forms part of the plaintiff's Mouza Kadamtola or of the defendant's Mouza Sitaijhar. The Trial Court decreed the suit in part holding that a partition of the land in suit belonged to the plaintiff's mouza. On appeal by the plaintiff, the learned District Judge found that the entire land in suit belonged to the plaintiff's mouza and decreed the suit. Against this decree the present appeal has been preferred by defendant No. I making all the plaintiffs and some of the defendants-respondents to the appeal. During the pendency of the appeal in this Court the plaintiff, respondent No. 3 Gopal Das Roy Chowdhury died and an application was made by the appellant after the period of limitation fixe...
Manindra Chandra Nandi Vs. Bhagabati Devi Chowdurani and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-11-1925
Reported in: AIR1926Cal335
Suhrawardy, J.1. The present suit was brought by several persons for declaration of title to and recovery of possession of, the disputed land which is said to be on the boundary between the plaintiff's and the defendant's mouzas. The real issue in the case that was tried was whether the disputed land forms part of the plaintiff's mouza Kadamtola or of the defendant's mouza Sitaijhar. The trial Court decreed the suit in part holding that a portion of the land in suit belonged to the plaintiff's mouza. On appeal by the plaintiff, the learned District Judge found that the entire land in suit belonged to the plaintiff's mouza and decreed; the suit. Against this decree the present appeal has been preferred by Defendant No. 1 making all the plaintiffs and some of the defendants respondents to the appeal. During the pendency of the appeal in this Court the plaintiff, Respondent No. 3, Gopal Das Roy Chowdhury died and an application was made by the appellant after the period of limitation fixe...
Agent, Bengal Nagpur Ry. Vs. Behari Lal Dutt
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-09-1925
Reported in: AIR1925Cal716,90Ind.Cas.426
Suhrawardy, J.1. This Miscellaneous Appeal (No. 180 of 1924) and the S.A. No. 1016 of 1924 are directed against the same decision of the Court below. There is also an application under Section 115, C.P.C., filed by the appellant against the same order. The explanation is that in the present unsettled state of the law the appellant could not decide on the proper procedure.2. The Miscellaneous Appeal was first heard and the learned Advocate for the respondent took a preliminary objection on the ground that no appeal lay. The facts of the case are that the plaintiff-respondent; brought a suit for recovery of the valve of certain goods which he had despatched, from one railway station to another on the Bengal Nagpur Railway but the goods were not delivered to the consignee. He accordingly raised the presents suit and in the plaint filed the name of the defendant was given as 'Agent of the Bengal Nagpur Railway Saheb Bahadur.' The defendant Mr. Young who was the Agent of the Bengal Nagpur R...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »