Kolkata Court March 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.
Mt. Sushila Sundari Choudhurani Vs. Tarak Chandra Roy Choudhuri and or ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal81,97Ind.Cas.489
B.B. Ghose, J.1. These three appeals arise out of three suits for rent. The plaintiff sued for his 15 gandas share of the rent making the co-sharer landlords parties to the suits. The present appeals refer to a question between the contending landlords. Both the Courts below have passed decrees in favour of the plaintiff. The appeals to this Court are preferred by the pro forma Defendant No. 3 one of the co-sharer landlords.2. The facts are these : A tenure was held by one Gour and certain other persons of whom it is only necessary to name Bhagwan. Gour had 1 anna 10 gandas share. On his death, he left a widow Shyama Sundari and two sons Tarak and Rajani. Each of the sons inherited 15 gandas share of the tenure. Bajani died leaving his mother as his heir. Tarak's 15 gandas share in the property was purchased in execution of a decree against him by a third person and with this share we are not now concerned. Shyama Sundari who inherited Bajani's share died and, after her death Tarak as ...
Raja Shyam Lal Singh Vs. Raj Kumar Thakur Madhusudan Singh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal253
Mukerji, J.1. This appeal is directed against an order passed by the Subordinate Judge of Asansole on the 15th June 1925. The order purports to grant the plaintiff's application for the appointment of a Receiver and states that the plaintiff is appointed Receiver of the disputed property during the pendency of the suit or until further orders but states as a condition that he would have to give security to the extent of Rs. 10,000 to the satisfaction of the Court within three weeks from the date of the order. It goes on to state that when appointed the Receiver will have to manage the properties under the direction of the Court and on certain terms. The Defendant No. 1 has appealed to this Court.2. A preliminary objection has been urged on behalf of the plaintiff-respondent as regards the competency of the appeal. It has been urged that the appointment of the plaintiff as Receiver was conditional on his' furnishing security and that inasmuch as the security called for has not yet been ...
Sushila Sundari Choudhurani Vs. Tarak Chandra Roy Choudhuri and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-1926
Reported in: 95Ind.Cas.489a
B.B. Ghose, J.1. These three appeals arise out of three suits for rent. The plaintiff sued for his 15 gandas share of the rent making the co-sharer landlords parties to the suits. The present appeals refer to a question between the contending landlords. Both the Courts below have passed decrees in favour of the plaintiff The appeals to 'this Court are preferred by the pro forma defendant No 3 one of the co sharer landlords. The facts are these: A tenure was held by one Gour and certain other persons of whom it is only necessary to name Bhagwan. Gour had 1-anna 10-gandas share. On his death, he left a widow Shyama Sundari and two sons Tarak and Raj ani. Each of the sons inherited 15-gandas share of the tenure. Raj ani died leaving his mother as his heir. Tarak's 15 gandas share in the property was purchased in execution of a decree against him by a third person and with this share we are not now concerned. Shyama Sundari who inherited Rajani's share died and, after her death, Tarak as t...
Abdul Gafur Chaudhury and anr. Vs. Abdul Jabbar Mia and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-15-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal30,97Ind.Cas.635
Cuming, J.1. In the suit out of which this appeal has arisen the plaintiff prayed for a declaration of his zemindari title to four-annas share in the land described in the khatian mentioned in the plaint; that his possession thereto may be confirmed; and that the settlement khatian might be declared wrong and fraudulent. There was a. further prayer that if the Court found that the plaintiff was out of possession, then possession of the said lands might be given to the plaintiff after declaration of title. His allegations in the plaint were that during the last Settlement operations, which took place in 1907, the lands in suit were recorded in the name of the principal defendants either through the fraud of the principal defendants or through the mistake of the Survey Amin, but that the lands were still in his possession. He then proceeded to state that the lands being at a great distance from his house, and near to the house of the principal defendants, the father of the principal defe...
Nirendra Chandra Bhattacharya Vs. Digendra Nath De
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-15-1926
Reported in: AIR1926Cal1100,96Ind.Cas.195
Cuming, J.1. The facts of the case are as follows: The petitioner who has obtained this Rule instituted a suit in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Cachar on the 27th September, 1921 for the recovery of Rs. 4,882-10-8 against two persons, defendants Nos. 1 and 2. Defendant No. 2 did not appear. Defendant No. 1 appeared and he stated that he and defendant No. 2 borrowed money from the plaintiff and he wrote the document. He, however, added that he was merely a surety, and at the same time a written petition was put in, in which he stated, that he was only liable as surety. On the 20th December, 1921, the learned Subordinate Judge Mr. G.D. Walker passed the following judgment 'defendant No. 1 examined, suit decreed on admission against defendant No. 1 and ex parte, against defendant No. 2 both with costs.' On the 7th January, 1922 the decree was drawn up in accordance with the judgment, namely, 'that the suit be decreed with costs on admission against the defendant No. 1 and ex parte...
Suresh Chandra Dutta and ors. Vs. Jaminikantata and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-15-1926
Reported in: AIR1926Cal1159,96Ind.Cas.711
Chakravarti, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendants against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge of Burdwan, dated the 4th June, 1923, by which the decree of the Munsif, First Court of Burdwan, dated 29th August, 1922, was confirmed. The suit out of which this appeal arises was for declaration of the right of way by the plaintiffs in their representative character of the inhabitants of the village for whom this right of way was claimed. The plaint describes this pathway as belonging to the villagers and the plaintiffs allege that the pathway was used for access to a tank the water of which was used for drinking and bathing purposes by the villagers and also for the passage of carts. One of the contentions of the defendants was that the suit was not maintainable without proof of special damage as the pathway according to the plaintiffs' case was a public pathway. On the merits the existence of the pathway was denied. The Munsif raised numerous issues and the 11th issue ran...
Kailash Chandra Gantail Vs. Meheruddi Sheikh and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal51,97Ind.Cas.604
Cuming, J.1. This appeal arisen out of an application by a tenant under Section 158 of the Bengal Tenancy Act asking the Court to determine the area of his tenancy. The landlord raised a number of objections among others that the application was not maintainable inasmuch as the relationship of landlord and tenant did not exist between the parties. The trial Court held that the area of the tenancy amounted only to some 14 bighas in the place of 18 bighas as mentioned in the defendant's pattah and to this extent he allowed the application. On appeal this finding of the Munsif was affirmed and the appeal was dismissed.2. The landlord has appealed to this Court and his contention is that the Court had no jurisdiction to determine the area of the tenancy, because he had raised the defence that the relationship of landlord and tenant did not exist between him and the respondent. He contends that since it is contended that the relationship of land lord and tenant does not exist between the pa...
Durga Mohan Chakravarti Vs. Ali Buksha Bepari and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal79
B.B. Ghose, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for rent with regard to the land in dispute for the year 1328 B.S. The Defendant No. 1, who is the tenant, contested the claim and pleaded that the suit was not maintainable on the ground that the plaintiff was only entitled to 1/3rd share and his brother's sons, who have not been joined, are owners of the remaining 2/3rd share. He also pleaded payment. Defendants Nos. 2 to 4 are mother's sister's sons of the plaintiff. The property in question originally belonged to one Kristo Chandra Chakravarty who had two daughters : Kali Tara, the mother of the plaintiff; and another daughter from whom the Defendants Nos. 2 to 4 were descended. The plaintiff had another brother who predeceased his mother. Plaintiff's mother died in the year 1328 and the plaintiff claims to be the 16-annas owner of the land in question by virtue of an arrangement between his mother and the Defendants Nos. 2 to 4 under which it is stated that his mother took the whol...
Durga Mohun Chakravartti Vs. Ali Buksha Bepari and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1926
Reported in: 97Ind.Cas.444
B.B. Ghose, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for rent with regard to the land in dispute for the year 1328 B.S. The defendant No. 1, who is the tenant, contested the claim and pleaded that the suit was not maintainable on the ground that the plaintiff was only entitled to |rd share and his brother's sons, who have not been joined, are owners of the remaining 1/3rd share. He also pleaded payment. Defendants Nos. 2 to 4 are mother's sister's sons of the plaintiff. The property in question originally belonged to one Kristo Chandra Chakravarty who had two daughters, Kali Tara, the mother of the plaintiff, and another daughter from whom the defendants Nos. 2 to 4 were descended. The plaintiff had another brother who predeceased his mother. Plaintiff's mother died in the year 1328 and the plaintiff claims to be the 16-annas owner of the land in question by virtue of an arrangement between his mother and the defendants Nos. 2 to 4 under which it is stated that his mother took the whole o...
Haridasi Devi Vs. Gadaghar Roy and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1926
Reported in: 96Ind.Cas.136
Cuming, J.1. This Rule has been issued against an order of the learned District Judge of Nadia summarily dismissing the petitioner's appeal.2. It would appear that the petitioner filed an appeal before the learned District Judge against an order on an application under Order XXI, Rule 90. The learned District Judge passed the following order: 'Record seen. Petitioner's Pleader fully heard. I summarily dismiss this appeal'. Dr. Pal, who has appeared for the petitioner, contends that Order XLI, Rule 11 is governed by Order XLI, Rule 31 and that the learned District Judge, in dismissing the appeal under Order XLI, Rule 11, is bound to observe the procedure described in Rule 31, that is to say he must write a judgment which will contain the points for decision, the decision thereon, the reasons for the decision and where the decree appealed from is reversed or varied, the relief to which the appellant is entitled. Now, as far as I can see, a Judge in dismissing an appeal under Rule 11 is n...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »