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.
Keshab Chandra Choudhury and anr. Vs. Joyfulnessa Bibi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-10-1927
Reported in: 116Ind.Cas.158
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 Munsif, 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 of the Code of Civil Procedure because when the suits are re-tried 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 Adv...
Jajneswar Karmakar Vs. Kailash Chandra Ghose
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-10-1927
Reported in: 107Ind.Cas.473
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 of the Limitation Act applied to the case.2. A Rule has been obtained on behalf of the defendant and one point is whether Article 145 of the Limitation Act applies or whether there should be a shorter period of limitation under Article 49 or 115. It is argu...
Sheikh Diljan Vs. Makbul Khan
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-10-1927
Reported in: 107Ind.Cas.475
Duval, J.1. In this case the plaint-tiff sued on a bond to recover a sum of Rs. 10 borrowed in 1922 with interest. The defendant contended that the bond was only for Rs. 5 and that it had been paid off. The learned Small Cause Court Judge found that the consideration was only Rs. 5 and the bond had been tampered with. But he found that the plea of payment of the defendant was not true. He dismissed the suit on the ground that it was based on a false document. Against this order a Rule has been obtained. I have been referred to the case of Parbati Charan Mukherjee v. Amarendra Nath Bhattacharjee 96 Ind. Cas. 97 : 53 C. 418 : A.I.R. 1926 Cal. 831 for the proposition that although the bond had been tampered with it was admissible to prove the existence of the debt of Rs. 5. On the other hand I have been referred to the English case of Suffel v. Bank of England (1882) 9 Q.B.D. 555 : 51 L.J.Q.B. 401 : 47 L.T. 346 : 30 W.R. 932 : 46 J.P. 500, and the old cases therein cited against such prop...
Ahamadar Rahman Vs. Dwip Chand Choudhury and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-09-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal281
Rankin, C.J.1. This is an appeal from an order, dated 5th March 1927, and made by the District Judge of Chhittagong under Section 476-B, Criminal P.C. It appears that the appellant was a tenant to and tahsildar of a certain party; He, in the course of his duty, appears to have collected rents due to his masters and there was certain litigation between the parties. In 1924 the masters brought certain rent suits for arrears in respect of the years 1920 to 1923 against the present appellant and his co-sharers. He pleaded full payment as regards the rent of 1920 and part payment as regards the later years, and on this latter point he supported his case by producing two dakhilas, Ex. A and Ex. A-1. It is said that Ex. A is a dakhila emanating from the sudder cutchery and Ex. A-1 was given by one Mahendra under orders of the sudder cutchery. Be that as it may, the Munsif, in whose Court the suit was brought, decreed the rent suit in full and appears to have made an observation that the dakhi...
Shyam Sundar Chakravarty Vs. Titaghar Paper Mills Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-08-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal123
C.C. Ghose, J.1. This is in an appeal from an order made by my learned brother-Mr. Justice Pearson on 6th December 1926 on an application made by the plaintiff Company under Ch. 13A of the Rules of this Court for summary judgment.2. The facts, shortly stated, are as follows : The defendant Shyam Sundar Chakravarty, who is the appellant before us, was on all material dates the Editor of the 'Servant' newspaper and Managing. Director of the defendant Company namely, the Servant Publishing Company Limited. It appears that the plaintiff Company supplied paper from time to time for the use of the defendant Company and as and when the goods were delivered, the appellant Shyam Sundar Chakravarty executed certain promissory notes for the value thereof. The promissory notes were eight in number. The plaintiff Company made attempts to realize the moneys due but did not succeed. There was on the date of the application a sum of Rs. 8,910-2-6 due to the plaintiff Company for principal and a sum of...
Serajul Islam and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-08-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal645
Rankin, C.J.1. In this case it appears that the eight appellants and another person were put upon their trial before the Sessions Judge and a jury on charge. under Section 302, I.P.C., and also upon charges under Sections 147 and 148.2. What was done with reference to the jury was this : that only 12 persons were summoned to attend the Court as jurors. Of these eight appeared on the day of the trial and, from the eight who appeared, seven persons were chosen to act as the jury. In these circumstances, Mr. Fazlul Huq, for the appellants, calls our attention to Sections 274 and 326, Criminal P.C., and he contends that the tribunal was illegally constituted and that all the proceedings should be set aside.3. Now, it is quite clear that under Section 274 where any accused person is charged with an offence punishable with death, the jury should consist of not less than seven persons and, if practicable, of nine persons. By Section 326 it is provided that the Sessions Judge, should send a le...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›