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.
Akshya Kumar Gope and anr. Vs. Sasanka Mohan Mukhopadhyya and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-02-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal62,97Ind.Cas.372
B.B. Ghose, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for rent on account of a putni which was held by the defendants under the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs stated they have howla interest in four mouzas appertaining to a certain number of taluks, and the defendants' putni is under the howla. The defendants pleaded that under a partition between the zemindars of the taluks, held under the Estates Partition Act they have lost possession of lands they held under the putni in one of the mouzas called Khidirpara and they are entitled to abatement of rent on account of those lands being taken away from their possession the plaintiffs alleged that by the partition neither they nor their lessees, the defendants, could be deprived of any land as in their case the provision of Section 99 of the Estates Partition Act was inapplicable; and they further pleaded that under the terms of the kabuliyat the defendants wore not entitled to abatement of rent.2. The Munsif made a decree for abatement of rent to...
Narendra Nath Dey Sircar Vs. Srimati Promilabala Dassi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-02-1926
Reported in: AIR1926Cal1225,97Ind.Cas.341
1. It is to be regretted that this matter has taken the present shape. It appears that one Sureswar appointed his father Manmatha trustee under a deed of settlement dated the 15th March, 1920, with power to appoint hi3 successor. On the 3rd July, 1922, before his death Manmatha appointed the petitioner (his brother)' and the opposite party Promilabala (his daughter-in-law) as his successors in the office of the trustee. Till the 11th September, 1924, the petitioner acted as a co-trustee; and it appears from the various papers that have been placed before us that he had the active management of the trust property in his own hands. On that day he executed a document by which he retired from the trusteeship and appointed Kalidas (another brother's son) as trustee in his stead. On the 29th November, 1924, Kalidas made an application under Section 72 of the Indian Trusts Act of 1882 for being discharged from the trusteeship. His case is that he was not aware of the real state of the trust p...
Nirode Kanta Chakraburtty Vs. Kripendra Kumar Chakraburtty and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-02-1926
Reported in: AIR1926Cal1192,96Ind.Cas.698
B.B. Ghose, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit to enforce a mortgage with regard to certain properties which, included a jote, defendant No. 1 was the mortgagor. Defendants Nos. 2 to 6 were made parties on the ground that they had acquired an interest in the equity of redemption and were necessary parties to the suit.2. Defendants Nos. 2 to 5 claim to be the sole landlords of the raiyati holding. They alleged that they sold the holding in execution of a rent-decree obtained by them and had purchased it, and after their purchase they served notice upon the plaintiff to annul his mortgage encumbrance under Section 167 of the Bengal Tenancy Act, so the mortgage with regard to the jote had been annulled. Defendant No. 6 is the tenant under them. On this state of the pleadings the trial Court went into the question whether the property in the hands of defendants Nos. 2 to 6 was liable for the mortgage-debt. It held that it was not, as these defendants had obtained the property, free from...
Radhanath Mandal Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-01-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Cal289
1. The appellant in respect of whom the appeal was admitted is named Radhanath Mandal. It appears that after the trial had commenced this particular accused, Radhanath, showed signs of insanity. The learned Judge's, attention being drawn to the facts because of what was observed by him in Court and because of the fact that the surety of Radhanath and his pleaders had given him up on the evening of the second day of trial, he asked the jury to observe closely Radhanath in Court and to form their own conclusions as to whether Radhanath was a person of unsound mind or not. The trial proceeded and in the end the jury gave their opinion that they did not consider that Radhanath was a person of unsound mind.2. It appears to us, however, that according to the provisions of Section 465, Criminal P.C., the learned Judge ought to have put to the jury as a preliminary issue to be tried by them as to whether or not the jury were satisfied that Radhanath was a person of unsound mind. This ought to ...
Shaikh Kalu Sarang and ors. Vs. Srimati Abedannessa Khatun
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-01-1926
Reported in: AIR1926Cal1221,97Ind.Cas.172
Cuming, J.1. In the suit out of which this appeal has arisen the plaintiff, who is the respondent before us now, sued the defendant for her dower. After various dates had been fixed for hearing the plaintiff was ready on the 25th of July. The defendant applied for time and the case was adjourned to the 22nd of August next for hearing. On the 26th of July an order was passed on a petition by the plaintiff that the defendant should pay Rs. 58-4-0 as costs. This order is incorporated in the order of the 25th July, the order concluding with the words 'the defendant would pay Rs. 58-4-0 as plaintiff's witnesses' costs'. It is, of course, obvious that this order could not have been passed till the 26th of July because no application was made till the 26th of July for payment of these costs. On the suit coming up on the 22nd of August, the date to which it had been adjourned, the defendant did not pay the money and his case was that he did not know of the order. As the case was not called on ...
In Re: Mogi and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-01-1926
Reported in: 96Ind.Cas.459
N.R. Chatterjea, Acting C.J.1. This appeal arises out of certain insolvency proceedings under the following circumstances.2. The insolvents Mogi & Co. carried on business in Japan and several other branches in various parts of the world. They banked with the appellants, The Yokohama Specie Bank Ltd. in the latter's branches at each place.3. The respondents, Messrs. Curlender, & Co. obtained a decree against Mogi & Co. for one lac and 84 thousand rupees on the Original Side of this Court and obtained an order for attachment before judgment of their assets in Bombay. The Yokohama Specie Bank (who may be referred to as 'the Bank') claimed a lien on the goods attached under a deed of hypothecation dated the 14th July, 1920, and the claim was allowed.4. On the 10th February, 1921, Mogi & Co. were adjudicated insolvents at the instance of Curlender & Co.5. After the adjudication, the Official Assignee obtained a declaration that the deed of hypothecation referred to above was invalid as agai...
BasiruddIn Haji and anr. Vs. Darbesh Khan Mea
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-01-1926
Reported in: AIR1926Cal1116,96Ind.Cas.548
Hugh Walmsley, J.1. These two appeals arise out of suits for ejectment under the provisions of Section 49(6) of the Bengal Tenancy Act. In Appeal No. 2259, the appellants are the second and the seventh defendants, father and son. In appeal No. 2260, the defendant No. 2 alone is the appellant. I will deal, first, with Appeal No. 2259 and notice the arguments put forward on behalf of the son--the defendant No. 7. They are two. It is said, first of all, that his father gave him an under-raiyatee of some land which included plot No. 896 and that he built a house on that plot, and that because of the interest created in his favour by his father he ought to have received a notice from the plain tiff before the institution of the suit. This argument appears to me fallacious because the defendant No. 2 could not create a relationship between the plaintiff and defendant No. 7 which would have any binding effect on the plaintiff. The second argument is that, by virtue of this, sub-lease from his...
In Re: Mogi and Co: the Yokohama Specie Bank, Ltd. Vs. S. Curlender an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-01-1926
Reported in: AIR1926Cal898
Chatterjea, Ag. C.J.1. This appeal arises out of certain insolvency proceedings under the following circumstances:2. The insolvents, Mogi & Co., carried on business in Japan and several other branches in various parts of the world. They banked with the appellants, the Yokohama Specie Bank Ltd., in the latter's branches at each place.3. The respondents Messrs. Curlender & Co., obtained a decree against Mogi & Co. for one lac 84 thousand rupees on the original side of this Court and obtained an order for attachment before judgment of their assets in Bombay. The Yokohama Specie Bank (who may be referred to as 'the Bank') claimed a lien on the goods attached under a deed of hypothecation dated the 14th July 1920, and the claim was allowed.4. On the 10th February 1921, Mogi & Co. were adjudicated insolvents at the instance of Gurlender & Co.5. After the adjudication, the Official Assignee obtained a declaration that the deed of hypothecation referred to above was invalid as against him, and...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›