Kolkata Court May 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.
Haran Chandra Karmakar Vs. Kishori Lal Ghosh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-19-1927
Reported in: AIR1929Cal789
Rankin, C.J.1. In this case the question arises in a proceeding before the Assistant Settlement Officer under Section 105, Ben. Ten. Act, The position is quite shortly this that the plaintiff has three causes of action. He puts forward a kabuliat as being the governing document of this tenancy and he asked first of all for Rs. 5 to be allowed because that sum of Rs. 5 was, on the basis of the terms of the kabuliat, a suspension of rent on account of 3 1/2 bighas of the holding being submerged under water at that time. He asked secondly for enhancement of rent because of rise in the price of the crops and he asked thirdly additional rent for additional area. There can be no doubt that the claim for Rs. 5 is a claim based upon the kabuliat ; that appears from the plaintiff's own claim before the Settlement Officer. The question of excess land is plainly a claim based upon the kabuliat not because he could not get it but for the kabuliat under the Bengal Tenancy Act but because it is imme...
Suresh Chandra Saha Chowdhury Vs. Gobind Nath Saha Chowdhury and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-18-1927
Reported in: AIR1927Cal796,103Ind.Cas.522
B.B. Ghose, J.1. The relevant facts may be shortly stated thus:There were two brothers Haranath Saha and Sambhunath Saha. Haranath had two sons, Govinda and Prosanna, and Sambhunath had one son, Sarat Chandra. The plaintiff is one of the three sons of Sarat Chandra described as Chhota Taraf in the proceedings. The descendants of Govinda are the principal defendants 1, 2 and 3, called the Bara Taraf. The sons of frosanna are pro forma defendants 4, 5 and 6 in suit. These pro forma, defendants have no connexion with the matter in controversy in this litigation. The plaintiff has one surviving brother Bhabesh, who is pro forma defendant 8 and is described as a minor in the plaint, represented by his certificated guardian and mother Ambica Sundari Choudhurani. There was a partition suit between the ancestors of the parties in 1907. A decree was made but it is unnecessary to state anything in detail about it. The plaintiff and his brother were minors when their father died and their mother ...
Corporation of the Town of Calcutta Vs. Ashutosh De
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-17-1927
Reported in: AIR1927Cal659,103Ind.Cas.683
ORDER23. In this appeal we have agreed to differ on a point of law which may be stated in these words for the purposes, of the proviso to Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Code:24. Whether the Corporation of Calcutta in assessing certain premises under Section 131, Sub-section (1) of the Calcutta Municipal Act in 1924 when the Calcutta Rent Act, 1920, was in force, were competent to increase the assessment above the rent at which the premises were let on the 1st November 1918 and which under Section 2, Sub-section (f), Clause (i) of the Calcutta Rent Act, 1920, was the standard rent of those premises.25. The papers will be laid before the Hon'bie the Chief Justice.Rankin, C.J.26. (His' Lordship after stating the facts continued). On one point the two learned Judges were in agreement. That point is not before us and it is no part of om intention to express any opinion whatsoever upon it. On another point they were in disagreement and accordingly they took action under the proviso to Sub...
Mt. Rahela Khatun and ors. Vs. Amburennessa Choudhurani and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-17-1927
Reported in: AIR1927Cal881
Page, J.1. This is an appeal from a decree of the learned District Judge of Noakhali. The plaintiff's suit, is to recover possession after dispossession of a 4-annas share in certain property. As regards 2-annas no question arises in this appeal. As regards the other 2-annas, this share of the property belonged to Rupjan, who from the genealogical table would seem to be the second wife of Kala Mian, the propositus. The plaintiff claims by a gift from her father Hosainuddi. Now, the plaintiffs suit being to recover possession after dispossession, she must prove her title to the property and also that she was in possession within 12 years before suit. She can have no better title in the circumstances of this case than her father Hosainuddi. Hosainuddi purchased the 2-annas share belonging to Rupjan at an auction-sale held in execution of a decree which Hosainuddi himself had obtained against Rupjan. With respect to this purchase the learned vakil on behalf of the appellant contended that...
Uma Charan Bose Vs. Rakhal Das Ray
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-1927
Reported in: AIR1927Cal756
B.B. Ghose, J.1. This is an appeal by the applicant for the grant of letters of administration with a copy annexed of what is alleged to be a will of one Upendra Nath Ray, dated the 5th July 1907. Upendra died in 1914 leaving a widow Damayanti. That lady obtained letters of administration of the estate of Upendra Nath Ray with a copy annexed of the document which was described in the grant as a trust-deed in 1916. The widow died in 1924 and the appellant thereupon applied for letters of administration with the document annexed on the allegation that on the death of the widow he was entitled to obtain letters of administration. The objector is the heir under the Hindu law of Upendra Nath Ray. This matter came up before the Subordinate Judge of Burdwan for hearing and he dismissed the application by an order dated the 3rd December 1925. The argument that was addressed to the learned Judge in the Court below on behalf of the appellant was that after the death of the widow of the executant...
In Re: Khondakar Mahammad Makhi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-1927
Reported in: 116Ind.Cas.173
1. These are three Rules obtained for the purpose of questioning the insertion in a list of persons proved to be touts the names of the three petitioners before us. We do not propose to express any opinion in these cases as to the mode of proof which must be followed by a Judicial Officer making an enquiry under Section 36 of the Legal Practitioners Act because no evidence of a nature known to the law that the persons who have obtained these Rules habitually acted as touts was obtained before their names were put in the list of touts. A large number of persons said to be over 100 in number, were paraded before the Judicial Officer making the enquiry apparently in the presence of a large body of members of the legal profession practising in the District. From the petitioners in these cases it appears that no evidence in the legal sense, oral or by affidavit or otherwise was relied upon before the names of the petitioners were inserted in the list of touts. Nothing that we say is to be t...
Jadu Nath Mandal Vs. Amulya Krishna Kundu and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-13-1927
Reported in: AIR1927Cal794
Mallik, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for contribution brought by the plaintiff for recovery of Rs. 542-8-3 from the defendants. The allegations on which the suit was brought were that one Malati Manjari Dasi had obtained a decree for maintenance against defendants 1 and 2 in 1916 with a charge on properties 1 to 3 in the suit, that the plaintiff subsequently purchased property 1 at an auction sale held in execution of a rent decree in 1917 and took possession thereof. But Malati Manjari executed her decree and put up that property to auction sale, that the said property was purchased at the sale by defendant 7 for Rs. 530 and by that sale the dues of Malati Manjari were satisfied and the charges on the other two properties were removed benefiting the other defendants who purchased them subsequently and making them liable to contribute. The defence was a denial of liability to pay any contribution and that the suit was barred by res judicata as well as limitation. The Court of ...
M.A. Sassoon and Sons Ltd. Vs. Gosto Behari De and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-12-1927
Reported in: AIR1927Cal629,103Ind.Cas.754
Cuming, J.1. This is an appeal by Messrs. M.A. Sassoon & Sons, Creditors No. 1 of an insolvent Gosto Behari De, against the order of the District Judge of Hooghly, declaring the said Gosto Behari De to be an insolvent. The facts of this case are briefly these. The insolvent Gosto Behari De was a banian of the firm of Messrs. M.A. Sassoon & Sons. He apparently carried on business for some time in Calcutta and got into financial difficulties.2. On the 13th November 1926 he made an application before the District Judge of Hooghly to be declared an insolvent. Notices appear to have been served on various parties. Meanwhile, on the 17th December 1926, the present appellants, Messrs. M.A. Sassoon & Sons applied to the insolvency Judge in the High Court to have Gosto Behari De declared an insolvent. On this application an order was passed fixing the hearing of this application in the High Court for Tuesday, the 18th January 1927, and there was a further order that all further proceedings in t...
Emperor Vs. Probhat Chandra Barua
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-11-1927
Reported in: AIR1927Cal793
Majumdar, J.1. In the present reference, the learned vakil who appears for the assessee confines himself to three items included in the first question, namely : item (v), item (vii) and item (viii).2. With reference to item (v), namely, fees received from land used for storing purchases of crops (paiati); what is actually meant by this is given in the petition of the assessee which he presented to the assistant commissioner of income-tax at Goalpara, He means the income which is derived for the use of land for storing purchases of food-crops, etc., by merchants, Evidently this does not come within the definition of 'agricultural income' as given in Section 2, Indian Income-tax Act. The income, as derived, is not derived from land used for agricultural purposes and, as such, such income cannot be claimed to be exempt from assessment.3. With reference to item (vii), i.e., punyaha nazar or nazar paid by tenants of agricultural holdings at-the beginning of the zamindari year, I am of opini...
NaimuddIn Biswas and ors. Vs. ManiruddIn Lashkar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-10-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal184
Cuming, J.1. The facts of the case out of which this appeal arises are these:In khatian No. 128 the rent of the holding was entered as Rs. 10. The plaintiffs who are the tenants of the holding brought a suit under Section 106, Ben. Ten. Act, on the allegation that the rent was really Rs. 7, and praying that the record might be corrected accordingly.2. The Assistant Settlement Officer held that the rent was Rs. 10 as entered in the Record-of-Eights and dismissed the plaintiffs' suit.3. The plaintiffs appealed to the Special Judge. The Special Judge was of opinion that the rent was Rs. 7 and decreed the appeal.4. The landlord-defendants, who are four in number, appealed to this Court.5. Before the hearing of the appeal one of the appellants, defendant 4, died. His heirs have not been brought on the record and consequently the appeal, so far as he is concerned, has abated.6. The respondent now contends that as the appeal has abated with regard to one of the appellants the whole appeal mus...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »