Kolkata Court June 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.
Bhagirathi Chowdhury and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-24-1925
Reported in: 92Ind.Cas.174
Suhrawardy, J.1. This appeal is by Bhagirathi Chowdhury and four others who have been convicted in accordance with the majority verdict of the Jury by the Sessions Judge of Rajshahi. The first accused has been convicted under Sections 147 and 325, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced under Section 325 to five years' rigorous imprisonment, no separate sentence having been passed under Section 147. The other four accused persons have been convicted under Sections 325/149, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to three years' rigorous imprisonment.2. The riot alleged to have taken place was over a piece of land, in course of which, it is said, one Mir Panchu was beaten to death. Several objections have been taken on behalf of the accused to the address by the Judge to the Jury; but it is sufficient to refer to two of these, as in our opinion, the. others are not important.3. The first objection is that certain statements have been admitted by the learned Sessions Judge which are inadmissible in ev...
Bashirulla Bhuiya and ors. Vs. Meajan and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-24-1925
Reported in: AIR1926Cal690,92Ind.Cas.593
Cuming, J.1. In the suit out of which. this appeal has arisen the plaintiffs sued the defendants for recovery of arrears of rent and cesses alleged to be due for the years 1323 to 1325 for a certain howla jama at an annual rent of Rs. 9-9 0 with interest at the rate of 75 per cent, per annum under a registered kabuliyat dated the 1290 B. S. corresponding to 1884.2. The Court of first instance decreed that plaintiffs' suit as against defendants Nos. 3 and 6 on contest and ex parte against the other defendants at the rate of Rs. 9-9 0 per annum inclusive of cesses with damages at the rate of Rs. 25 per cent. He did not allow interest at the rate of Rs. 75 per cent, per annum as claimed by the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs appealed to the District Court. That Court held that cesses were included in the rent, and it further held that the plaintiffs were not entitled to interest at the ratu of Rs. 75 per cent, per annum on the ground that the stipulation to pay interest at the rate of Rs. 75 p...
Baikuntha Nath De and ors. Vs. Shaik Hari and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-24-1925
Reported in: AIR1926Cal592,92Ind.Cas.899
Chakravarti, J.1. This is an appeal by defendants Nos. 1 and 2 and arises out of a suit for ejectment by the plaintiff. The defence of the defendants was that the tenancy was a permanent one and was not, therefore, determinable by the plaintiff-landlord.2. The Court of first instance dismissed the suit. The lower Appellate Court, reversed that judgment and decreed the plaintiff's suit with costs and made a decree for ejectment giving the defendants six months' time to vacate the land.3. In this second appeal by the defendants the learned Advocate for the defendants Contended first that the suit was bad, because one of the sub-lessees was not a party to the suit. We do not think that mere non-joinder of a party in an ejectment suit is fatal to the trial of the case. It may be that the party not being impleaded may not be bound by the decree. But so far as the defendants are con-earned it has been found that they have no right to retain possession of the land.4. The second ground which w...
Durga Prosad Lahiri Choudhuri and ors. Vs. Ratan Mahommed Sarkar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-24-1925
Reported in: 92Ind.Cas.897
Chakravarti, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendants and arises out of a suit for possession of a share of a jote by the plaintiff. The main ground of defence was that the suit was barred by the special Law of Limitation as provided for in Article III of Schedule III to the Bengal Tenancy Act. This defence was given effect to by the Trial Court and the suit was dismissed. On appeal by the plaintiff the learned Subordinate Judge of Dinajpur has found that the plaintiff has purchased a share of the jote from the owners thereof and that dispossession was by one Jogendra who had purchased also a share of the same jote. Although Jogendra was an officer of the defendant the landlord the finding of the lower Appellate Court is that Jogendra dispossessed the plaintiff as a purchaser of a share of the jote and not as an agent of the landlord. In this view the lower Appellate Court held that the suit was not barred by limitation and sent the case back to the learned Munsif for ascertaining the ...
Sreemati Chowdhury Maheswari Dei Vs. Gaurhari Maity
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-23-1925
Reported in: AIR1926Cal767,91Ind.Cas.380
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff and arises out of a suit brought for recovery of arrears of rent. The main question which arises for decision is what is the effect of certain ex parte rent-decrees obtained by the plaintiff against a tenant who held the land before the defendant purchased the tenancy in execution of a decree for rent obtained by the plaintiff, the landlord against the previous tenant. The facts as stated by the plaintiff appear to be these. One Annapurna held the lands in suit as a raiyat with right of occupancy under the plaintiff at a rent of Rs. 10-6 annas per year for 8 bighas and odd of Land. That Annapurna sold the holding to one Bhagirath in the year 1906, but Annapurpa continued to be the recorded tenant at the time when a suit for arrears of rent as brought and decreed ex parte against her in 1908. This decree, it appears, was for rent for a number of years and the rate of rent claimed was Rs. 10-6 annas a year. This decree was satisfied. On the 30th Augu...
Nripati Nath Bhattacharjee Vs. Jatindra Kumar Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-23-1925
Reported in: AIR1926Cal577,91Ind.Cas.407
Ewart Greaves, J.1. This is an appeal by the judgment-debtor No. 4 from an order of the Fifth Subordinate Judge of Dacca, dated the 4th April 1923. The application before the learned Subordinate Judge was to set aside the sale of the properties of the judgment-debtor on the ground that there had been irregularity in the sale and that no sale proclamation was issued in the case. This is Ji6w the matter was opened to us, as the argument proceeded it was urged that the failure to publish the sale-proclamation was not merely an irregularity but an illegality and that the sale was, therefore, vitiated. The debt due to the decree-holder is Rs. 7,000 and odd and it is said that the properties of the judgment-debtor which were sold for just over Rs. 1,000 were in fact worth upwards of Rs. 27,000.2. Now, the facts are set out quite clearly and succinctly in the judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge. He states that in January 1922, the decree-holder applied for execution of the decree and th...
Bhabadeb Chatterjee Vs. Bhusan Chandra Mukherjee and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-23-1925
Reported in: 91Ind.Cas.712
Pearoson, J.S.A. No. 543 of 1923.1. The plaintiff claims the use of the water in the defendant's lank for bathing and other purposes. His claim has been upheld.2. The argument on behalf of the appellant has been rested very largely upon considerations arising upon the English authorities relative to the law of easements, prevailing in that country, though it is indeed conceded that the word in its use ink. 26 of the Indian Limitation Act, as shown by the explanation in Section 2 is wider than the meaning of the word in English Law and, would include at least a profit a prendre. In cases of this character-attention has been directed by the Judicial Committee to the danger of proceeding necessarily upon English authorities. In Bhola Nath Nandi v. Midnapore Zemindary Co 31 C. 503 : 31 I.A. 75 : 8 C.W.N. 425 : 14 M.L.J. 152 : 8 Sar. P.C.J. 611 (P.C.), a case of villagers claiming a right of pasturage, Lord Macnaghten said: 'It appears to their Lordships that on proof of the fact of enjoyme...
In Re: Gopal Dass Auroba
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-23-1925
Reported in: 91Ind.Cas.975
Pearson, J.1. This is an appeal against an order made by the Registrar in insolvency, dated the 5th June 1925, by which he refused to pass a protection order in favour of the insolvent. He has set out the grounds on which he relies in his order, and the broad ground upon which his action has been taken is that the insolvent is a trader, carried on a joint family business of which family he was the karta, and that the looks have not yet been produced before the Official Assignee. It appears that at the time the adjudication order was applied for, the Registrar in insolvency-refused the application on the same ground. The order, however, was made by this Court on the 23rd April, and the schedule was filed. It appears from the order of the Registrar that the insolvent filed a list of his books at the time of his application for adjudication. It appears that they are in the possession of two Receivers who were appointed in a partition suit between the insolvent and the infant members of hi...
Bengal Nagpur Railway Company Ltd. Vs. Co-operative Hindusthan Bank Lt ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-23-1925
Reported in: AIR1926Cal1089,97Ind.Cas.606
Lancelot Sanderson, C.J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant Railway Company from the judgment of my learned brother Mr. Justice C.C. Ghose delivered on the 1st of August, 1924.2. It appears that a man called Badree had agreed to supply certain goods, viz., dog spikes, to the Railway Company. He made out two bills in respect of these goods. He arranged with the plaintiff Bank that they would make advances to him to the extent of 80 per cent, of the amount of the bills. Before completing the arrangement the Bank sent a representative to the office of the Chief Engineer of the Railway at Garden Reach, and made certain enquiries from the Head Clerk of the Chief Engineer. The enquiries were directed to the question whether the bills in question were genuine. He was informed that the bills were in order and that the Railway Company would pay the bills in due course. Having got that information on the 1st of November, the arrangement, to which I have already referred, was made between the B...
Raja Rishi Kesh (Rishi Case in Vakalatnamah) Law Vs. Sons and Heirs of ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-23-1925
Reported in: AIR1926Cal736,92Ind.Cas.48
Chakravarti, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff and arises out of suit for recovery of cesses from the holders of a rent-free tenure. The plaintiff's case was that he was made liable for the payment of cesses for the rent-free tenure held by the defendants and had paid the same, that he now brought the suit for the recovery of the amount so paid, that the inclusion of this rent-free tenure within the zemindari of the plaintiff was duly published by the Collector under Section 52 of the Cess Act on the 29th of June, 1908, and that after the publication of the notification the defendants became liable to pay the cesses to the plaintiff. The defendants in the suit denied the publication of the notification, under Section 52. It appears from the case of Ashanulla Khan Bahadur v. Trilochan Bagchi 13 C. 197 : Ind. (N.S.) 630 that the publication of such notice should be strictly proved before the liablity of the defendants can arise. To obviate the difficulty of proving such Notificatio...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »