Kolkata Court July 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.
Satyaranjan Bakshi and anr. Vs. King-emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-05-1927
Reported in: AIR1927Cal698,103Ind.Cas.771
C.C. Ghose, J.1. This is an appeal by two persons named Satyaranjan Bakshi and Pulin Behary Dhar, who have been, convicted by the learned Chief Presidency Magistrate of Calcutta under Section 124A, I.P.C., and sentenced as follows; namely, the appellant 1 to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 300 and, in default, to undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment and appellant 2 to pay a fine of Rs. 250 and, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two months. Appellant 1 is the editor and appellant 2 is the printer of a newspaper published in Calcutta called the 'Forward.' They were charged under Section 124A, I.P.C., for having brought or having attempted to bring into hatred or contempt and for having excited or having attempted to excite disaffection towards the Government established by law in British India, by editing, printing and publishing respectively an article entitled 'Anarchy' 'in Pabna in the issue of the Forward newspaper...
Johurmull Bhutra Vs. Kedarnath Bhutra
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-05-1927
Reported in: AIR1927Cal714
Rankin, C.J.1. This is an application brought on the 22nd. February 1927 to set aside a consent decree passed : in a partition suit on the 24th January 1927. The suit was brought by the infant plaintiff Kedarnath Bhutra by his mother as next friend. The defendant Johurmull Bhutra is the brother of the plaintiff's deceased father Hira, Lal, and the general character of this suit was that the plaintiff claimed that since the death of his father Hira Lal and indeed before, the defendant had been is occupation and enjoyment of properties which had been joint between the two brothers. It would seem to be accurate that before Hira Lal's death the brothers had separated and that there bad been no actual division of the ijmali property.2. It may be mentioned that in the year 1900 Hira Lal and the defendant had executed a deed of trust whereby a certain property at Lilooah had been conveyed to the trustees on behalf of a certain deity. So far as can be ascertained the trustees at the relevant t...
Rohini Kumar Pal Vs. Kusum Kamini Pal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-05-1927
Reported in: 105Ind.Cas.725
B.B. Ghose, J.1. This appeal is by the defendant No. 1 against, a portion, of the decree of the Subordinate Judge and arises out of a suit for maintenance brought by the plaintiff, a Hindu widow, out of the estate left by her deceased husband. Defendant No. 1 was the son of her husband by another wife. There were other defendants in the suit who were joint in mess with her husband, but they have no concern with this appeal as the suit was dismissed against them. The plaintiff sued as a pauper, and her claim was for future maintenance at the rate of Rs. 30 per month for herself and at the rate of Rs. 15 per month for the minor daughter she had by her husband. There was also a claim for arrears of maintenance for six years and three months which was valued at Rs. 4,444 odd, The future maintenance was valued at Rs. 5,400. All the defendants contested the suit. The plaintiff brought another suit for some ornaments alleged to have been kept with the defendants. We are not concerned with tha...
Chuni Lal Mandal Vs. Hira Lal Mandal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-04-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal378
Chotzner, J.1. This is an application to vacate a decree made by this Court by consent of parties on 15th December 1926.2. The parties to the litigation are related to each other as sons and mother, the plaintiff and defendant 1 being sons and defendant 2 being the mother.3. After the case had been opened and one witness was being examined certain terms were put in by Mr. Roy who appeared for defendant 1 and these were accepted by Mr. Ghose for the plaintiff and by Mr. Mitter for defendant 2, though it does not appear that any of the learned Counsel actually signed the proposed terms. Thereupon an order was made by consent embodying the terms recorded, giving the parties liberty to apply during the enquiry which was to be held by Mr. H.K. Mitter, Barat-Law. On the following day Mr. Mitter informed the Court that his client Nistarini Dassi was not prepared to accept the terms embodied in the agreement. Notice was thereupon given to the other two learned Counsel and the matter was heard ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›