Kolkata Court December 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.
Nabadwip Chandra Chakravarti and ors. Vs. Bhagaban Chandra Choudhry
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-07-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal462
Mukerji, J.1. The Defendants Nos. 1 to 4 are the appellants in this appeal. The appeal arises oat of a suit instituted by the plaintiff for joint possession of the lands in suit with the Defendants Nos. 1 to 4 to the extent, of-the plaintiff's share. The suit was dismissed by the Gourd of first instance, but on an appeal preferred by the Plaintiff the Subordinate Judge has reversed that decision and decreed the suit. The facts shortly stated are there: The plaintiff alleges that there is a niskar named Amar Prasad Choudhury and Jai Narayan Choudhury in which he was a malik to the extent of 3 annas 15 gandas share. The owners of the other shares are the pro forma defendants Nos. 7 to 29. Another pro forma defendant in the suit, namely, one Aisali, had, under this niskar, a nontransferable occupancy holding which consisted of the land in suit. On the 5th Magh 1324 Aisali transferred the holding to the Defendant No. 4. On the 18th Bhadra 1328 the Defendant No. 1 purchased a share in the m...
ismail Munshi and anr. Vs. Niamat Khan and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-07-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal608,101Ind.Cas.738
Mukerji, J.1. The Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 are the appellants in this appeal. The facts relating to the suit out of which this appeal has arisen, are as follows : At the instance of the Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 certain proceedings under Section 133 of the Criminal Procedure Code were taken by a criminal Court in respect of an alleged public channel or water-course. The said public channel or water-course is said to have been in existence over the plaintiffs' land, and through it, it is alleged, the surplus water of the lands lying to the south of the plaintiffs' land used to be drained off towards the north. As a result of these criminal proceedings the alleged public channel or water-course was found to-have been obstructed and an order was passed under the provisions of that Code for the removal of that obstruction, the practical result of which was that the channel or water-course, such as it was, was re-excavated. Thereafter the plaintiffs who were interested in the lands over which ...
AzimuddIn and anr. Vs. Ali Hosan and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-07-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal921
1. The plaintiff's case was that they held certain land part of which diluviated and that after diluvion a suit was brought to restrain the landlord from realizing full rent and a decree was obtained for proportionate reduction of rent. That was in the year 1906. In 1916 the lands re-formed and it appears that the landlord subsequently let them out to the defendants. The plaintiff, however, denied that they Bad ever relinquished their right to the diluviated lands and' brought a suit in 1921. Both the Courts have decreed the suit. There are certain findings of fact with which we are not concerned to prove title to the land and to prove that the suit is not barred.2. The only point argued before us in second appeal is that as plaintiffs brought a suit after diluvion and got a decree for proportionate abatement of rent they had lost all rights to them. We do not think that the tenant obtaining' reduction of rent is a circumstance which, in the absence of any overt act showing an intentio...
Navadwip Chandra Chakravarti and ors. Vs. Bhagaban Chandra Chowdhury
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-07-1926
Reported in: 101Ind.Cas.27
Mukerji, J.1. The defendants Nos. 1 to 4 are the appellants in this appeal. The appeal arises out of a suit instituted by the plaintiff for joint possession of the lands in suit with the defendants Nos. 1 to 4 to the extent of the plaintiff's share. The suit was dismissed by the Court of first instance but on an appeal preferred by the plaintiff the Subordinate Judge has reversed that decision and decreed the suit.2. The facts shortly stated are these. The plaintiff alleges that there is a Niskar named Amar Prasad Choudhury and Jai Narayan Choudhury in which he was a malik to the extent of 3 annas 15 gandas share. The owners of the other shares are the pro forma defendants Nos. 7 to 29. Another pro forma defendant in the suits namely, one Aisali, had under this Niskar a non-transferable occupancy holding which consisted of the land in suit. On the 5th Magh, 1324, Aisali transferred the holding to the defendant No. 4. On the 18th Bhadra, 1328, the defendant No. 1 purchased a share in th...
Noni Krishna Basak Vs. Nabamonjuri Dassi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-06-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal464
1. The petitioner alleges in para. 3 of his petition that on the 10th July 1926, the day on which the order complained of was passed his witnesses were in attendance and his vakil, though not called on, insisted on the evidence of those witnesses being taken, but that the Court refused to take that evidence and disposed of the application of the opposite party for leave to sue as pauper upon the basis that there was no opposition by the Government to such application. This statement is supported by an affidavit and is not contradicted before us. On the other hand, there is on the record a list of witnesses present which was filed on that day and in which the names of three witnesses appeared as having been present on the occasion. It is clear, therefore, that the Munsif disposed of the matter without taking such evidence as the petitioner had offered before the Court. Having regard to Rule 6 and Rule 7 of Order 33, the former of which requires a notice to be given to the opposite party...
Behari Lall Sen and ors. Vs. Gour Chandra Biruni and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-06-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal606,101Ind.Cas.758
Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs and arises out of a suit for a declaration that the defendants are only bhag tenants and that the decree in the Commutation Case No. 130 of 1921 is not binding against the idol, the plaintiff. It may be mentioned here that the present suit was instituted by one Behari Lal Sen puporting to act as a shebait of the idol Sri Sri Durga as also on behalf of the Plaintiffs Nos. 2 to 12 who allege that they had also the powers of supervision over this endowment. The suit was for recovery of paddy and bhag rent for the year 1328 which they assessed at Rs. 50. The defence was that on the question as to whether money rent or bhag rent was recoverable the decision of the Settlement Officer under Section 40 of the Bengal Tenancy Act is conclusive against the plaintiff. The defence also alleged that with regard to their status as to whether they were bhag tenants or occupancy raiyats there was a previous decision in Suit No. 392 of 1919 which was conc...
Heeralal Agarwalla and Co. Vs. Joakim Nahapiet and Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-03-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal391
Pearson, J.1. This is an application to take off the file an award made under the rules of the Calcutta Baled Jute Association. The arbitration clause is that of the ordinary printed association contract, which provides for the appointment of the arbitrators and an umpire. Then the concluding words are:The award made by them respectively, if no appeal therefrom, shall be admitted by the Committee, or the award of the Committeee made on any appeal therefrom as provided, for in the Association rules and by-laws (which is printed on the reverse form part of, this contract,) shall be final.2. The rules and bye-laws of the Association carried out the scheme of the clause and provided for an appeal to the Committee. Rr. 28 and 29 are as follows:28. The Committee may at their discretion, and upon payment of the prescribed fees, hear appeals from arbitrators awards provided they proceed in conformity with the, bye-laws of the Association.29. The award of the Committee in any appeal considered ...
Saradindu Mohan Mukerjee and ors. Vs. Girish Chandra Tewari
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-03-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal511,101Ind.Cas.334
Mukerji, J.1. This Rule had been issued to show cause why an order passed by the Munsif of Ranaghat, dated the 29th June 1926, and referred to in the petition upon which the Rule has been issued should not be set aside or such other or further orders passed as to this Court may seem fit and proper. It is not necessary to refer to the earlier proceedings that took place in connexion with the execution case out of which this Rule has arisen. We may begin for our present purposes from the 29th June 1926, the date on which the order in question was passed by the learned Munsif. On that day the learned Munsif disposed of certain proceedings that were pending before him for setting aside the sale which had taken place in the said execution proceedings. This order appears to have been passed sometime at about 4-30 in the afternoon. There is some controversy as to whether the pleader for the petitioner decree-holder was present in Court at that moment or not and it is fairly clear that the pet...
Kasem Ali Vs. King-emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-03-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal949,101Ind.Cas.481
Gregory, J.1. This is an appeal by one Kasem Ali who was tried before a jury in the Court of the Sessions Judge of Bakerganj and convicted and sentenced under Section 120-B, I.P.C.2. The facts of the case may be stated briefly in view of the circumstances under which we consider it necessary to interfere with the conviction and sentence of the accused. The facts are shortly these : It would appear according to the prosecution that there was ill-feeling on the part of the accused Kasem towards Kagal Sardar his uncle the deceased on account of Kagal wishing to sell his properties and so deprive the accused Kasem of them, by reason of a misunderstanding that had arisen between them. The accused Kasem was living in the same bari as his uncle and the case is that on the 10th February 1926 the deceased Kagal Sardar whose murder is the subject of one of the charges, was sleeping in the eastern hut while his wife Sherjan Bibi slept in the western hut. One Jamila the wife of the accused Kasem A...
Secretary of State for India Vs. Fakir Mohammad Mandal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-02-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal415
B.B. Ghose, J.1. All these appeals are on behalf of the Secretary of State against the judgment of the Special Land Acquisition Judge of Alipur in a number of cases which were heard by him on reference made under the Land Acquisition Act. The reference was with respect to the valuation of the property made by the Collector.2. Appeal No. 57 should be taken up first as it involves a question of law with reference to the interpretation of the Bengal Sanitary Drainage Act 8 of 1895 (B.C). The land in question in all these cases were acquired for the purpose of constructing a drainage under that Act. The land in connexion with Appeal 57 was in the bed of a watercourse and the Collector purporting to act under the provisions of Section 16 of Act 8 of 1895 allowed no compensation for the land in question. The appellant asked for reference on the ground that the land was within his zemindari and was valuable, and having regard to its advantageous position he ought to be allowed 750 rupees per ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »