Kolkata Court November 1927 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.
Sambhunath Basak and anr. Vs. Abdul Kader and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-16-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal247
Duval, J.1. In this case one Harendra Lal Basak and two minors, represented by their mother, sued in ejectment certain defendants. On 14th June 1926, the plaintiffs and defendant 3 filed a petition of compromise and a petition by the guardian for leave to compromise under the provisions of Order 32, Rule 7, Civil P.C., was also put in. By the compromise defendant 3 was to pay a certain nazar and get the tenancy of some of the lands. With the other defendants there was no proposed compromise. The learned Munsif did not then consider the petition of compromise because, as he expressed in his judgment, he wished to be satisfied after hearing the case as to whether it was in the interests of the minors. But on 28th August 1926, the three plaintiffs by another petition sought to withdraw from the compromise on the ground that there had been misrepresentation and that the guardian of the minors in fact knew nothing about it. The Munsif during the trial came to the conclusion that there was n...
Jotirmoy Goswamy and ors. Vs. Guru Gobinda Goswami and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-16-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal273a
Duval, J.1. This rule is heard ex parte. In this matter the plaintiff sued to recover a certain share of a tank on declaration of his title thereto. The defendant appeared, the case was adjourned until it was over a year old and on 15th June last came on for hearing. The plaintiff was examined and the defendant was examined in part. A verbal application followed by a written application was then made on behalf of the plaintiff as there were certain formal defects - leave was prayed for to withdraw from the suit with liberty to bring a fresh suit. This application was strenuously opposed and the learned Munsif rejected it. But instead of then finishing the case and deciding it on the evidence on the record and on such further evidence in the case as might be adduced he made declaration that the plaintiff is permitted to withdraw from the suit without liberty to bring a fresh suit with costs to be paid to the contesting defendant and subsequently made a memo, of such costs. Now as was po...
Hazrat Gul Khan Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-15-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal430
Cuming, J.1. This is the case of one Hazrat Gul Khan who has been tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of 24 Parganas sitting with jury. The jury found him guilty of murder under Section 302, I.P.C. The learned Judge agreeing with the verdict of the jury has sentenced the accused to death; and his case has been referred to this Court under Section 374, Criminal P.C. for confirmation of the sentence. The accused has also preferred an appeal against his conviction and sentence.2. I may here note that the accused Hazrat Gul Khan was tried on the same charge once before. In that trial the jury unanimously acquitted him. The learned Sessions Judge who tried the -ease referred the case to the High Court and a retrial of the case was ordered.3. The facts of the case are shortly these: The accused Hazrat Gul Khan and the deceased Mahammad Alim whom he was accused of murdering are Peshwaris. The deceased was the brother-in-law of the accused. On the day of occurrence, the 6th of Novem...
Ambika Ranjan Majumdar Vs. Manikganj Loan Office Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-15-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal468
Suhrawardy, J.1. This is an application by the appellant for permission to file an appeal out of time on the ground mentioned in the petition, The ground is that there were two suits brought against the appellant by two creditors : one was valued at over Rs. 5,000 and the other much below it. Both the suits were decreed and the decrees put into execution. The appellant's properties were sold in the suit which was valued at over Rs. 5,000 and the decree-holder in the other execution case applied for rateable distribution of the money realized from the sale of the properties. The appellant applied to have the auction sale set aside under Order 21, Rule 90, Civil P.C. That application was after trial dismissed on 28th February 1927. The appellant's case is that as he was lying seriously ill at that time he sent the necessary costs and papers to his pleader at Dacca who was a pleader of over 15 years' standing and having considerable practice. The pleader, under a wrong impression that the...
Nahar Lal Shah and anr. Vs. Baij Nath Shah and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-14-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal385,113Ind.Cas.855
C.C. Ghose, J.1. This appeal must, be dismissed and for the following reasons. The appeal arises out of an action brought by the plaintiff firm for a declaration that a certain Indenture of Conveyance executed in their favour, on 8th December 1921, by the first five defendants gives them an absolute right of ownership in the entirety of premises No. 187, Durmahatta Street, free from, encumbrances, and for a further declaration that a certain mortgage executed on 25th June 1921, by the said defendants in favour of the firm of Nahar Lal Shah Parnesswar Doyal Shah, who hereinafter called defendant 6, is null and void and for an order for cancellation thereof and for delivery of the said mortgage-deed and of vacant possession of a certain go-down and stable in premises No. 187, Durmahatta Street, at present occupied by defendant 6. There is a further claim for mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 300 per month from the date of conveyance.2. The first five defendants did not appear to contest t...
Bhupendra Mohan Pal Choudhuri Vs. Jatindra Chandra Bose
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-14-1927
Reported in: AIR1929Cal289
Duval, J.1. In this case the opposite party is a school mister. He was appointed by the petitioner who was the Secretary of the Lohajang High School provisionally as a teacher in January 1923 on a pay of Rs. 45 a month and joined his post. In the following March the Committee resolved that owing to financial stringency they could not keep six graduates on the staff and so they deter-mined that the opposite party's, services and those of two others be dispensed with. No action appears to have then been taken in the matter which came up again on 24th July and then the Committee finally dispensed with the opposite party's services resolving that he will not be required after 16th August. He then on 16th August ceased to work and was paid up to that date, at the rate of Rs. 45 a month. He appears to have claimed that he was entitled to some notice and that he only got notice on 8th August but waiting for sometime just within the period of limitation he brought a suit in the Small Cause Cou...
Ezra Meyer Aaron Cohen Vs. Kumar Debendra Lall Khan
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-11-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal89
C.C. Ghose, J.1. This is an appeal against a judgment and decree passed and made by my learned brother Mr. Justice Page on the 25th February 1927 in an action by the plaintiff to recover possession of a block of buildings lying at the corner of Wellington Street and Dhurrumtolla Street. The plaintiff based his cause of action for recovery of possession of the premises upon the breach of (1) a covenant to pay rent, and (2) a covenant to repair contained in the Indenture of lease dated 3rd August 1906. As regards the covenant to pay rent, it appears that, before the suit came on for hearing, the defendant who is the assignee of the original lessee had deposited in Court the amount of rent due by and from him to the lessor. Mr. Justice Page came to the conclusion that in these circumstances the Court was entitled to exercise its powers under Section 114, T.P. Act and give the necessary relief to the tenant. On the question whether there had or had not been a breach of the covenant to repa...
Chandra Nath Sen and anr. Vs. Nagendra Nath Ganguly
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-10-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal263a
Duval, J.1. These two Rules have been obtained against an order of the District Judge of 24 Pargannas holding that an application to enquire into and rectify certain acts of the Receiver in an insolvency case was out of time and so could not be entertained. It appears that in a certain insolvency case a Receiver was appointed and he attached from the bargadars of one of the petitioners' paddy and sold it as being the property of the insolvent and in the other case he attached certain furniture. It appears that he also warned the tenants not to pay any more rent except to himself. The two petitioners feeling aggrieved at this order moved the District Judge, but he held that the matter came under Section 68, Provincial Insolvency Act, and so, as the application was made more than twenty one days after the Receiver had taken possession of the properties, the matter was barred.2. Thereupon applications were made to this Court and two Rules obtained on 24th June 1927. Subsequently, it appea...
Keshub Chandra Choudhury and anr. Vs. Joyfulnessa Bibi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-10-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal397
Duval, J.1. These two Rules were obtained in respect of two orders in two rent suits setting aside in their entirety two ex-parte decrees. It appears that in these suits there were in all fourteen defendants, five of whom were females. Decrees were passed ex parte and subsequently there were sales, but the finding of fact is that the summons had not been legally served on the five female defendants who also had been kept out of the 'knowledge of the decrees for a considerable period after the decrees were passed. The learned Munsiff, therefore, set aside in toto the two ex-parte decrees on the application of the five ladies. Against this order these Rules were obtained.2. A preliminary point is taken that, as a matter of fact, this is not a matter for the use by this Court of Section 115, Civil P.C. because when the suits are retried, the order setting aside the ex-parte decree will be then liable to be attacked in appeal, and in support of that proposition, the learned advocate for th...
Ajneswar Karmakar Vs. Kailash Chandra Ghose
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-10-1927
Reported in: AIR1929Cal143
Duval, J.1. In this case the plaintiff sued for refund of certain gold and silver kept in the custody of the defendant or in lieu of the price thereof. His case was that he handed over two tolas of gold and some silver ornaments to the defendant in 1923 for making some ornaments but the defendant never made the ornaments and refused to return the gold and silver. The defendant pleaded among other things limitation and denied receipt of these ornaments from the present plaintiff. The learned Small Cause Court Judge found as a matter of fact that the plaintiff did make over the gold and silver to the defendant but the defendant did not make the ornaments and did not carry out his share of the contract. He held further that Article 145, Lim. Act, applied to the case.2. A Rule has been obtained on behalf of the defendant and one point is whether Article 145, Lim. Act, applies or whether there should be a shorter period of limitation under Articles 49 or 115. It is argued that the handing o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »