Kolkata Court November 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.
Jatindra Nath Roy and anr. Vs. Indu Bhushan Basu
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-18-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal410
Cammiade, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs against the dismissal of a suit by the Court of appeal below. The suit was for rent of a holding bearing an annual rental of Rs. 8-4-0 for the years 1325 to 1328. The total amounts claimed excluding cess and damages comes to Rs. 34-0-6. The suit was decreed in the first Court but it was dismissed on appeal.2. A preliminary objection has been taken to the hearing of this appeal on the ground that none of the questions which make the decision appealable have been decided by the Court of appeal below. When we turn to the judgment of the lower Court we find that although the defendant admitted the tenancy and although he admitted the anuual rentali and there was no plea of payment by him, the learned Subordinate Judge dismissed the suit on the ground that the lands described in the plaint as comprised within the tenancy are not the properties of the plaintiffs but are the properties of the defendant. As there is no dispute regarding the ex...
Hachanuddi Vs. Asimaddi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-18-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal417
Cammiade, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant against a decree declaring the title of the plaintiffs to certain lands and ordering recovery of possession, The suit was instituted on the 26th February 1923. The defendant's case is that the land had never belonged to the plaintiffs and he has pleaded further that if the lands had ever belonged to the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs' title was extinguished by lapse of time. It would appear that two of the plaintiffs, as representing the entire body of the landlords, instituted a suit for rent in the year 1910 against this defendant, be written statement filed by the defendant is not on the record; but from the judgment of the Court of first instance, which is dated the 29th of September 1910 it would appear that the defendant denied the relationship of landlord and tenant and that that defence was given effect to by the Court. More than twelve years elapsed between the 29th of September 1910 and the 26th of September 1923 when the suit was...
E.St.C. Moss and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-18-1926
Reported in: 100Ind.Cas.358
Cuming, J.1. This is an appeal by five persons, Jumman Bepari, Tasaddak, Hossain alias Bachu Mia, Mahammad Kurban Hossain, Tilla Mahmud Khan and E.St.C. Moss who have been convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Dacca sitting with a Jury under Section 46 of the Bengal Excise Act read with Section 120B, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment and fine.2. The case for the prosecution briefly is that the accused Moss who was a Sergeant in the Railway Police at Dacca went down to Calcutta ostensibly because his wife was ill but substantially in order to arrange for smuggling cocaine from Calcutta to Dacca and for that purpose he engaged in a conspiracy with the four other accused Bachu Mia, Kurban Hossain, Tilla Mahmud Khan and Jumman Bepari. In pursuance of this conspiracy one Kalu Mia who was a servant of the accused Moss set out for Dacca from Calcutta with a box which contained a quantity of cocaine. Bachu Mia who is one of the appellants went wit...
Hari Charan Sil and anr. Vs. BipIn Behari Mukhopadhya and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-17-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal374
Cammiade, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendants in a suit for rent. These defendants had originally held the land on condition of paying half the crop as rent. The rent in kind was commuted as a result of proceedings under Section 40 of the Bengal Tenancy Act. The plaintiffs who are the landlords, sued for arrears of rent in kind. The defendants pleaded commutation and offered to pay rent according to the order of the revenue officer. The plaintiffs took three objections to the order of the revenue officer to the commutation. All the three objections were overruled by the first Court which gave a decree for rent in accordance with the revenue officer's order. In appeal two of the objections taken before the lower Court were given up and the only objection that was pressed was that one of the plaintiffs was a minor whose natural guardian had been served with notice in the proceedings for commutation, and that that natural guardian had not appeared and contested the proceedings before...
Surja Kumar Tewari Vs. Ratan Choura and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-17-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal406
Mukerji, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for rent in which the plaintiff claimed rent at an enhanced rate under Section 30, Clause (b) of the Bengal Tenancy Act. His suit has been decreed at the existing rate, the prayer for enhancement being refused by the Courts below. He has appealed.2. The plaintiff's case was that there was an occnpancy jote held by Keshab Pal and Jadab Pal which stood in the name of the former and consisted of 19 and odd bighas of land and bore a rental of Rs. 23 and odd, that Keshab Pal having left, Jadab Pal alone held the said jote, that thereafter some more lands were settled with Jadab Pal and on that the area of the jote became 27 bighas and odd and the rental was raised to Rs. 37 and odd, that in 1295 Jadab Pal took settlement of some more lands and obtained a pottah in respect of the total area which was then found to be 31 and odd bighas and the rental was again enhanced to Rs. 42 and odd. The defendants purchased a portion, namely, 24 and odd bigh...
Chandi Charan Roy and ors. Vs. Siraj Mia
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-17-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal479
Cammiade, J.1. This is an appeal by the mortgagees-defendants in a suit for redemption of the mortgage. At the trial the defendants had alleged that there had been a sale to them and not a mortgage but that contention of theirs has been given up. The suit was dismissed in the first Court, which found that there had been a sale. The Court of appeal found that the transaction was a usufructuary mortgage the principal amount borrowed being Rs. 25 and the intention being that the usufruct of the land should be enjoyed in lieu of interest. That Court further found that the plaintiff had tendered the amount of the mortgage-debt to the defendant in Pous 1329, and that tender had been refused by the defendants. It accordingly gave a decree for redemption of the mortgage on deposit of Rs. 25 by the plaintiff within two months of the date of the decree and ordered that an account be taken of the usufruct enjoyed by the defendants from the date of the tender up to the date of recovery of possessi...
Gouranga Sundar Mitra and anr. Vs. Mohendra Narayan Mitra and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-17-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal776
1. This an appeal by defendants 1 and 5 against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge of Dinajpur. The plaintiff sued as a pauper for declaration of title to and recovery of joint possession of one-fourth share of the properties in the hands oil defendants 1 and 5. The story of the plaintiff's right to the property may be very shortly stated thus : There was one Kali Prosad Mitra, the ancestor of the parties, who died in 1882. He had five sons. The eldest was Kunja Behary who died only recently after the decision of the case in the Court below. Rash Behary, the second son, was the father of the plaintiff, who died in 1893. Jadav was the father of defendant 1 who died in the year 1913. Trailokhya is defendant 4 in this suit and Brojo, defendant 2, in the suit. The plaintiff's case was that Kali Prosad had a homestead and some land. The income of the property which belonged to Kali Prosad was insufficient to maintain the family. Kunja Behary, the eldest son of Kali Prosad, liv...
Siddik Ahmed Kerani Vs. Azizar Rahaman Khan and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-16-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal238
1. In this case the plaintiff brought a suit to have his Sadar Putni Taluka right declared and Khas possession given in certain properties alleging that one Jogendra Lal Chowdhury had purchased the estate under Act 11 of 1859 and had given him a Patni lease with powers to avoid the encumbrances on the land and obtained Khas possession. The first Court declared his title to most of the lands, excluding some mosques and burial grounds, and found that he was entitled to obtain Khas possession. In appeal the learned District Judge upheld the declaration of the plaintiff's title in respect of the land decreed by the lower Court, but set aside the order for Khas possession. The appeal before us is directed against that order.2. A preliminary objection is taken, first of all, with reference to the question whether the Registrar o this Court was competent to admit the appeal out of time as it appears that the full Court-fees were not put in within the period of limitation. On this point the ru...
Sri Sri Kalimata Debi and anr. Vs. Nagendra Nath Chuckerbutty and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-12-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal244
Chotzner, J.1. This is a suit instituted fey Sri Sri Kalimata Devi established at No. 28, Sovabazar Street, by her next friend Srimati Basanta Kumari Debi and by the said Srimati Basanta Kumari Debi as one of the worshippers of the said deity, for a declaration that the deed of revocation and mortgage executed by one Suresh Chunder Chuckerbutty are not binding upon the idol. The facts of the case are a follows:Nemai Chunder Chuckerbutty, who died in 1894, left four sons : Sashi, Suresh, Nagendra and Debendra. Sashi and Debendra died before the 1st, May 1922, on which date Suresh executed a deed of trust in favour of himself and his brother Nagendra in regard to two properties, being No. 12 Beniatolla Street, and 18 Sovabazar Street. The deed of trust provided that Suresh and Nagendra should be the Shebaits to carry on the worship of the idol and that Chandi, Nagendra's son, and Gourmohau, Debendra's son, should also be added to the category of Shebaits upon attainment of their majority...
Gopal Chandra Saha Vs. Abdur Rahim Biswas and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-11-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal492,103Ind.Cas.538
Suhrawardy, J.1. A preliminary objection is taken on behalf of Respondent No. 1 to the hearing of this appeal. The facts on which it is based are somewhat peculiar. The appellant brought a mortgage suit against Respondent No. 1 with a further prayer that in case it was found that any amount was paid to the pro forma defendants who are the heirs of the original mortgagees and from whom the plaintiff purchased the mortgage, that amount might be decreed as against those defendants. The defence was a plea of payment of a certain amount by the Defendant No. 1 to the original mortgagees, the predecessors of the other defendants. The Munsif in the first Court did not believe the plea of payment and passed a preliminary mortgage decree against the Defendant No. 1. On 18th July 1923 that decree was made absolute. The Defendant No. 1 preferred an appeal against the preliminary decree to the District Judge who, by his order, dated the 11th March 1924, set aside the preliminary decree in so far as...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »