Kolkata Court January 1926 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.
Kailash Chandra Ghosh Vs. Hamid Ali and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-17-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal243
Cuming, J.1. In the suit out of which this appeal has arisen the plaintiff sued for rent for two years, 1281 and 1882 M.E. at the rate of 78 aris of paddy. He valued the paddy at 1 1/4 aris per rupee and laid his claim at Rs. 160-14. The contention of the defendant was that the jama was a money one of Rs. 39 only and that that was taken as the fixed price of 78 aris of paddy.2. The first Court decreed the plaintiff's suit in full holding that the plaintiff was entitled to get the price of 71 aris of paddy a year at the rate of 1 aris per rupee. The defendant appealed to the District Court and the learned District Judge held on a construction of the kabuliyat that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover rent at more than Rs. 39 per annum with cess and damages at 25 per cent.3. The plaintiff has appealed to this Court and the contention he puts forward is that he is entitled on a proper construction of the kabuliyat to recover rent at the rate of 78 aris of paddy a year at the present ...
Secretary of State Vs. K.S. Bannerjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal45,97Ind.Cas.140
Walmsley, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the Secretary of State against the decision of the Land Acquisition Judge on a reference under the provisions, of the Land Acquisition Act.2. Some land was acquired for the extension of the Medical College Hospital, and the plot under consideration lies immediately to the east of the plot to which Appeal No. 158 relates. Before the Collector the claimant asked for compensation at the rate of Rs. 10,000 per katta and Rs. 20,000 for what was called severance. In the reference the claim per katta was reduced to Rs. 6,000 nothing was said about severance, but in the Judge's Court the sum demanded on that account was Rs. 4,500. The Collector awarded Rs. 4,000 per katta and gave nothing for severance. The Judge has enhanced the rate per katta to Rs. 5,000 and has added Rs. 2,500 for severance.3. A preliminary objection has been taken on the ground that the appeal has been filed on a stamp of fifteen rupees only. It is said that full Court-fees on th...
Srimati Saudamini Ghose Vs. the Jessore Registered Loan Company Limite ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-1926
Reported in: AIR1926Cal1146,96Ind.Cas.554
Cuming, J.1. This is an appeal against an order of the learned Subordinate Judge of Jessore disallowing certain objections to execution and ordering that execution should proceed.2. The facts appear to be these: The decree-holder obtained a money-decree against the judgment-debtor on the 24th of June, 1911. The decree was executed a number of times and finally on the 6th June, 1923 the application with which we are now concerned was made. The judgment-debtor made a number of objections to the execution of the decree. It is unnecessary for me to set out what these objections were, because none of them has been argued in appeal. The objection in the present appeal is entirely new and was not taken before the Executing Court. The objection is as follows: The appellant contends that certain specifications which were necessary, under Order XXI, Rule 11 were not set forth in the application for execution and that being so the whole of the proceeding was a nullity. The particular specificatio...
Shamsud Ali Vs. Miriam Elias and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-13-1926
Reported in: AIR1926Cal1140,97Ind.Cas.710
Ewart Greaves, J.1. This is an appeal by the first defendant against a decision of Mr. Justice Buckland. The facts are not in dispute and I may state them very shortly.2. The claim in the suit was for a sum of Rs. 20,000 based on an agreement, dated the 28th of August, 1919, and the agreement came to be under the following circumstances:--One Abdul Gunny between the 25th of September, 1918, and the 2nd of April, 1919, executed ten promissory notes and hundis for Rs 22,100 in all in favour of the plaintiff Miriam Elias and also one promissory note, one for Rs. 1,100, in favour of the plaintiff Jonah Reuben Jacob. These were assigned by Miriam Elias and Jonah Reuben Jacob on the 2nd of July, 1919, to the defendant Alee Coyne for realization. Coyne instituted two suits to recover the amounts due on the hundis and the promissory note. He obtained a decree in the first suit for a sum of Rs. 22,485 odd, but before the second suit was brought to trial an agreement was arrived at between the p...
Kanappa Chetty and ors. Vs. Sugan Chand Daga
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-13-1926
Reported in: 96Ind.Cas.375
Buckland, J.1. This is an application to set aside an order of 18th May, 1925 giving the assignee-of a decree made on the 8th March, 1912, liberty to execute the decree and for transmission of the decree to a Court in the Madras Presidency for the purpose.2. The applicant states he was never served with notice of that application and he relies on his own petition verified by the affidavit of K.N.M. Kasi Viswanath Pillai as well as the affidavits of other persons. I may say at once that I do not decide upon the facts or any point argued or touched upon in the affidavits other than that to which I shall presently refer, not that they have been abandoned, but because the point upon which I propose to dispose of this matter appears to be conclusive and entirely sufficient for the purpose.3. The affidavit of service of the original notice is by K.P. Raju Naidu who says that he is the village headman of village Sirukunapatti in the District of Ramnad in, the Presidency of Madras. He then goe...
Srimati Basanta Kumari Debi and anr. Vs. Beni Madhab Mahapatra
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-13-1926
Reported in: AIR1926Cal1058,95Ind.Cas.788
1. This is an appeal by the defendants Nos. 1 and 4 against a judgment of the Subordinate Judge of Midnapore, affirming a decision of the Munsif of Tarnluk. The point which, has been raised on behalf of the appellants is clearly stated thus: There was a Record of Rights in which the disputed lands were recorded as forming part of one jama. The landlord then made an application for increase of rent under Section 105 of the Bengal Tenancy Act. There was a decision and the rent was increased. The present suit has been brought for a declaration that the Record of Rights recording the two lands in two schedules as appertaining to one jama is erroneous and that the sale held of the lands in question was void.2. Both the Courts below have passed a decree in favour of the plaintiff. The contention is that the proceedings taken under Section 105 bar the present suit under Section 109 of the Bengal Tenancy Act.3. It is contended on behalf of the appellants that in order to increase the rent the ...
Sugan Chand Daga Vs. Kanappa Chetty and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-13-1926
Reported in: AIR1926Cal977
Buckland, J.1. This is an application to set aside an order of 18th May 1925, giving the assignee of a decree made on the 8th March 1912 liberty to execute the decree and for transmission of the decree to a Court in the Madras Presidency for the purpose.2. The applicant states he was never served with notice of that application and he relies on his own petition verified by the affidavit of K.N.M. Kasi Viswanath Pillai, as well as the affidavits of other persons. I may say at once that I do not decide upon the facts or any point argued or touched upon in the affidavits other than that to which I shall presently refer, not that they have been abandoned, but because the point upon which I propose to dispose of this matter appears to be conclusive and entirely sufficient for the purpose.3. The affidavit of service of the original notice is by K.P. Raju Naidu, who says that he is the village headman of village Sirukunapatti in the District of Ramnad in the Presidency of Madras. He, then goe...
Akshoy Kumar Chakraburty Vs. King-emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal175a
1. The fasts giving rise to this Rule shortly stated are as follows : The petitioner before us is a postal peon. On the 30th June 1925, ha addressed a complaint to the police through the postmaster of the Raj Khamar Post Office against a person named Bhujendra Nath Bhattacharjee charging him with having abused and assaulted him and with having misappropriated a number of postcards and envelopes and cash belonging to Government which were in the possession of the petitioner. The complaint was forwarded to the Sub-Inspector of Police who reported to the Magistrate on the 13th July 1925 that the charges against Bhujendra Nath Bhattacharjee were false. the petitioner was informed on the 15th July 1925, by the Sub-Inspector of Police that the petitioner's charge? against Bhujendra Nath Bhattacharjee were false. This information it would apear was given to the petitioner under the provisions of Section 173(b), Criminal P.C. on the 16th July 1.925, it appears from the order-sheet, that the pe...
Dearish and ors. Vs. Dwijadas Chakrabarty and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-1926
Reported in: 97Ind.Cas.1007
Mukerji, J.1. This appeal arises out of an applicantion under Section 105 of the Bengal Tenancy Act for settlement of fair and equitable rent and also for additional rent for additional area. The only question before us is whether the presumption under Section 50, Sub-section (2) arises upon the circumstances of the case. The Assistant Settlement Officer granted an enhancement of rent to the plaintiffs. On an appeal preferred to the Special Judge, the Special Judge dismissed the plaintiffs' claim in that respect. The plaintiffs thereupon preferred an appeal to this Court, and the appeal was dealt with by my learned brother B.B. Ghose, J., who hasmadean order of remand From this order the present appeal has been preferred under the Letters Patent on behalf of the tenant-defendants.2. The plaintiffs' case was that the presumption under Section 50, Sub-section (2) of the Bengal Tenancy Act did not arise as there had been enhancement of rent of the defendants' holding on two occasions: fir...
Torap Ali and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-1926
Reported in: AIR1926Cal1059
1. The appellants before us are five in number. They were tried by the Additional Sessions Judge of Bakarganj with the aid of a jury and have been convicted under Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code. The Appellants 1 and 2 have been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months, while the Appellants 3 to 5 have been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year.2. The facts giving rise to the prosecution shortly stated, are as follows: On the 4th December 1924, the complainant, Chootoo Fakir, married a widow named Hatiman as his third wife with her free consent. Hatiman had two brothers, namely, the Appellants 4 and 5. Their consent was not taken to the marriage, the marriage being celebrated at the place of Hatiman's deceased husband, Elimaddi Mridha, and registered on the 4th December 1924. Since the date of the marriage Chootoo and Hatiman lived as man and wife. On the 20th December 1924, the Appellants 4 and 5 tried to take Hatiman away ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »