Kolkata Court August 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.
Man Mohan Pandey Vs. Hari Nath Chaudhury and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-05-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal408
Page, J.1. This is an appeal from a decision of the learned Special Judge of Jessore reversing a decision of the Assistant Settlement Officer of Jessore. The appeal arises out of an application 'by a landlord under Section 105, Ben. Ten. Act, for settlement of fair and equitable rent. A large number of holdings were under consideration, but this appeal relates only to eight of them. The record-of-rights is in favour of the landlord, and an the record-of rights is an entry to the affect that the holdings under dispute are those of settled raiyats, and, therefore, prima facie the rent was liable to enhancement under certain circumstances. The tenants who are now respondents pray in aid Section 50, Sub-section (2), Ben. Ten. Act, and produced dakhilas which proved to the satisfaction of both Courts that these eight holdings had been held at a uniform rate of rent for more than 20 years. In order to rebut the presumption which under such circumstances will arise in favour of the tenants th...
Mon Mohan Pandey Vs. Hari Nath Chaudhury and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-05-1927
Reported in: 110Ind.Cas.338
Page, J.This is an appeal from a decision of the learned Special Judge of Jessore reversing a, decision of the Assistant Settlement Officer of Jeesore. The appeal arises out of an application by a landlord under Section 105 of the Bengal Tenancy Act for settlement of fair and equitable rent. A large number of holdings were under consideration, but this appeal relates only to eight of them. The Record of Rights is in favour of the landlord, and in the Record of Rights is an entry to the effect that the holdings under dispute are those of settled raiyats, and, therefore, prima facie, the rent was liable to enhancement under certain circumstances. The tenants who are now respondents pray in aid Section 50, Sub-section (2) of the Bengal Tenancy Act, and produced dahlias which proved to the satisfaction of both Courts that these eight holdings had been held at a uniform rate of rent for more than 20 years. In order to rebut the presumption which under such circumstances will arise in favour...
Sadhu Kathalia and ors. Vs. Dhirendra Nath Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-04-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal425,113Ind.Cas.247
Rankin, C.J.1. This is a some what unusual case and a very good illustration of the difficulties which are created for the lower Courts and which they themselves assist to create. The plaintiffs are eight persons called Boy who claim to be interested in a certain revenue paying estate under the Collectorate of Jessore and to have in addition a kaiemi mokurari mourashi jote thereunder; in other words they claim to be eutitled to the superior interest in the suit lands and the share they claimed is 13 annas four pies share. Among the many defendants there is a group of defendants described as co-sharer pro forma defendants who are entitled to the remaining share. The cause of action might be very simply stated. It is that sis parsons, one Erfanaddi and five others, whom I may call the Bairagis, having agreed on certain terms to become tenants of certain lands and to execute a kabuliyat refused to do so and by executing and causing to ba registered a false kabuliyat which the plaintiffs n...
Rishee Case Law Vs. Golam Ali Mirdha and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-04-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal548
Page, J.1. This is a suit brought by a cosharer landlord under Section 148A, Ben. Ten. Act, to recover arrears of rent. The plaintiff has impleaded the two tenants of the land whose names are recorded in the Record-of-Rights, and has made his cosharer landlords pro forma defendants. One of the two tenants-defendants has not appeared. The other has pleaded that he is entitled to an abatement of rent on account of diluvion. The fact of diluvion has been established. It appears, however, that there are two other co-tenants of the holding who are not parties to the suit, and the plaintiff contended that the contesting defendant is not entitled to an abatement of rent in the absence of the other cosharer tenants. The trial Court upheld the plaintiff's contention, and passed a decree for the full arrears of rent claimed without abatement. On appeal the decree of the trial Court was set aside, and the suit was remanded for the ascertainment of the amount of the abatement to which the defendan...
Gocool Chunder Law and ors. Vs. Jamal Biswas and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-04-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal553
Rankin, C.J.1. This is an appeal from a decision of the Special Judge of Jessore, affirming a refusal on the part of the Assistant Settlement Officer of Jessore to give to the appellant additional rent for additional area under Section 52, Ben. Ten. Act.2. Plaintiff's case is that there was a partition under the Estates Partition Act in the year 1909, that the Deputy Collector in accordance with powers given to him under Ch. 6 of that Act, measured the lands comprised in the tenancy and that it was found upon that measurement that the area in the occupation of the tenant was some 78 bighas. It is said that in the Record-of-Bights it is found that the area now in the occupation of the tenant has increased. Accordingly it is said that there have been two scientific measurements and that the previous measurement for the purposes of the Estates Partition Act should be taken as showing what the area was for which the tenant was then paying rent, and that he is now proved to be in posses-of ...
Sarat Chandra Rakhit Vs. Sarala Bala Ghosh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-03-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal63
Roy, J.1. This appeal is by defendant 1. The suit brought by the plaintiffs was one for recovery of possession of a certain plot of land on establishment of their title and also for correction of an entry in the record-of-rights. The plaintiffs' case was that this plot of land was plot No. 2732 of the zemindari's chitta prepared in 1234 B.E. It was at one time chakran land. The 'chakran' was resumed, and thereafter the land was settled with Bowson Mamud Haldar, the predecessor-in-interest of defendants 1 to 8 in the suit. One Fazal Bhangi took settlement of the disputed land from the heirs of Rowson Mamud Haldar and, in execution of a money-decree obtained against him and the sale thereunder, the land was sold and purchased by the plaintiffs. The defendant is the gantidar of Beel Pabla and it was said in the suit that he dispossessed the plaintiffs and got himself wrongly recorded in the settlement 'khatian' which was prepared in 1918. The plaintiffs brought a suit soon after the final...
Barsik Nandi Mandal and anr. Vs. Gurudas Pal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-03-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal107
1. This suit is brought to recover khas possession of certain land on declaration of the plaintiff's title thereto. The lower appellate Court has passed a decree in favour of the plaintiff in respect of one only of the plots of land in dispute. Now, the plaintiff seeks to recover khas possession. He was a mortgagee of the property in suit and the mortgage-debt and the interest thereon at all material times exceeded Rs. 100 and it has been found as a fact by the lower appellate Court that the value of the mortgaged property was not Rs. 100. In his capacity as a mortgagee the plaintiff is not entitled to immediate khas possession of the property. But in support of his claim to khas possession he tendered in evidence a document in the following manner:Being unable to pay up the mortgage debt, principal and interest I give up the right and possession of the properties morgaged to the mortgagee and by so doing I am absolved from the liability of the mortgage debt.2. That document was not re...
Kamala Prosad Sukul Vs. Chandra Nath Pramanik and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-03-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal180
1. This appeal arises out of a final decree determining mesne profits. The proceedings followed a decree for possession with mesne profits in favour of the plaintiff and against a very large number of defendants who belong to two classes, viz., the landlord-defendants and the tenant-defendants. The. plaintiff has appealed, but some of the defendants of the latter class are not before us, one of them not having been made a party to the appeal and three others having died and an application to substitute their heirs in their places not having been allowed as it was filed out of time. The decisions of the Courts below assessing the amount of mesne profits are concurrent.2. A preliminary objection has been taken as to the maintainability of the appeal in view of the defect of parties noticed above. This objection will have to be dealt with first.3. The claim for mesne profits is one to recover damages for the previous occupation of the land and under the present procedure it can be joined ...
Port Canning and Land Improvement Co. Ltd. Vs. Jogendra Mandal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-03-1927
Reported in: AIR1928Cal533
Mitter, J.1. These five appeals arise ?out of five suits brought by the plaintiff-company in the Court of the Munsif of Basirhat, for enhancement of rent of the tenants-respondents, who are non-occupancy raiyats, after service of notice under Section 46, Ben. Ten. Act. The plaintiff company tendered to the tenants-respondents in each of five suits an agreement to pay enhanced rents and the tenants-respondents within three months before the institution of each suit, refused to execute the agreement. Thereupon the plaintiff-company brought five suits for determination of fair and equitable rent and for ejectment in case the tenants-respondents failed to pay the fair and equitable rent determined by the Court under Section 46, Clause (6), Ben. Teh. Act. Decrees were passed in each of the five suits to the effect that if the tenants-respondents agreed to pay the rent determined under Section 46, Clause (6), they shall be entitled to remain in possession of the holding at that rent for a te...
Ananta Lal Sinha Vs. JahiruddIn Biswas and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-03-1927
Reported in: AIR1927Cal816
C.C. Ghose, J.1. In this case we are of opinion that the rule must be made absolute. The facts are somewhat peculiar and it is necessary therefore to set out the same at some length. The accused in this case were convicted by the Sub-Divisional Officer of Jangipur under Sections 143, 150, 153, 506 and 298, I.P.C., and were sentenced to various terms of imprisonment by his judgment dated the 29th September 1926. Jangipur is a sub-division in the district of Murshidabad, and the accused, after conviction, preferred an appeal to the Sessions Judge of Murshidabad. When the appeal came on for hearing on the 4fch March 1927, it appears that the public prosecutor was instructed by the then magistrate of the district, Mr. M.S. Adie, to inform the Court that the Grown had decided to withdraw from the prosecution of the accused who, as stated above, had already been convicted by the Sub-Divisional Officer of Jangipur, and he prayed for the Court's sanction under Section 494, Criminal P.C. The Se...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »