Kolkata Court January 1928 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.
Abdul Rahim and ors. Vs. Tufan Gazi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-25-1928
Reported in: AIR1928Cal584
Mukerji, J.1. The plaintiffs are the appellants in this appeal. They instituted the suit which has given rise to this appeal for recovery of possession on declaration of their right of pre-emption in respect of a 4 annas share in a tank with its banks. The entire tank with its banks at one time belonged to the plaintiffs who in Sravan 1325 sold a 6 annas share of the same to defendant 1. There was a condition in the sale-deed, which, translated literally, runs:Be it mentioned that if any necessity arises for you (i.e., vendees) to sell the tank and its banks, you shall not be entitled to sell the same anywhere else : on receipt of proper price you will give the same to us (i.e., the vendors); and also if any necessity arises for us to sell them instead of selling them elsewhere we shall sell them to you on receiving proper price.2. The plaintiffs' case was that in violation of this stipulation defendant 1 sold a 4 annas out of the share purchased by him to defendants 2 to 6, and coming...
Court of Wards, Durga Prosad Sen Gupta and ors. Vs. Madhab Krishna Nan ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-25-1928
Reported in: AIR1928Cal824,110Ind.Cas.871
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for rent. The plaintiffs are the appellants to this Court. It would appear that the suit was brought by a manager under the Court of Wards on behalf of a number of Persons. It would further appear that the suit was actually decided by the Subordinate Judge in appeal on 9th January 1925. On 11th January 1925, hat is, before the appeal was filed in this Court which was done on 23rd March 1925, one of these disqualified proprietors, Durga Prosad Sen Gupta, died. Ono attempt was made to bring his heirs on the record before the appeal was filed; and the appeal was filed in his name by the manager although at the time he was actually dead. An application was made on 9th November 1925, for the substitution of his heirs. This application was rejected. The position, therefore, is that one of the co-sharer landlords is not an appellant in this appeal. The suit being a suit for rent the appeal in its present from is incompetent. The appeal, therefore, stands di...
Adhar Chandra Bhattacharya and ors. Vs. Srimati Sushila Sundaripal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-25-1928
Reported in: 109Ind.Cas.35
Mallik, J.1. The suit out of which this appeal arises was one brought by the plaintiff as a reversioner on the death of her mother to recover the estate of her father Brojo Kishore. The allegations on which the suit was brought were briefly these. The property formerly belonged to one Naba Kishore who died leaving behind him two sons, Gour Kishore and Ram Kishore. Gour Kishore on his death was succeeded by his widow Anund Kumari to the extent of an 8 annas share in the property and Ram Kishore was succeeded by his eon Brojo Kishore to the extent of the other half. On the death of Brojo Kishore his widow Swarnamoyee the mother of the plaintiff succeeded to the 8 annas of the estate and on her death the plaintiff was entitled to the property as her reversioner. According to the plaintiff her mother Swarnamoyee and Anund Kumari sold their properties to one Nabin Chandra Chaudhuri in 1288 B.S. on the allegation of a number of legal necessities in the deed of sale though, as a matter of fac...
Kanteswar Sarkar and anr. Vs. Indramani Dashya
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-24-1928
Reported in: AIR1928Cal512
Mallik, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of arrears of rent, The plaintiffs claimed rent at the rate of Rs. 10 per year. Whereas the case of the defence was that the rent annually payable by the defendants was Rs. 2-8-0 only. The trial Judge accepted the figure as given by the plaintiffs and on that basis gave a decree to the plaintiffs for rent at the rate of Rs 10 per year. On appeal the lower appellate Court did not consider the plaintiffs' evidence on the question of the rate of rent sufficient, and holding that the kabuliyat which had been filed by the plaintiffs in support of their case did not relate to the land in suit allowed the appeal and gave the plaintiffs a decree only at the admitted rate, namely Rs. 2-8-0 per year. The plaintiffs have come up to this Court on second appeal.2. A preliminary objection was taken on behalf of the respondent that no second appeal lay in the present case under Section 153, Ben. Ten. Act. I think this objection is sound and s...
Shaik Sattar Dewan and ors. Vs. Shaik Sajed Ali and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-24-1928
Reported in: 108Ind.Cas.732
Mallik, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of possession of some land on establishment of the plaintiffs' title thereto. The suit was resisted by defendants Nos. 1 and 2 on the allegation that the plaintiffs had neither any title to the land nor were ever in possession thereof. The Court of first instance found the evidence of title unsatisfactory on both sides but holding that the plaintiffs were in possession of the land gave them a decree. On appeal the learned Subordinate Judge agreed with the trial Court on the question of the plaintiffs' title but holding that the plaintiffs had not been in possession of the land in dispute allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit. The plaintiffs have come up to this Court on second appeal.2. It was contended on behalf of the appellants that the finding of the lower Appellate Court on the question of title, based as it is on a wrong interpretation of a certain document, a kobala, Ex. I, is unsustainable and it was argued that the...
Khagendra Prasanna Sen Vs. Sasi Mohan Tarkasastri and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-23-1928
Reported in: AIR1928Cal406,110Ind.Cas.340
Mallick, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of arrears of rent. The defence inter alia was that the defendant was entitled to a reduction of the jama as admittedly a portion of the holding had been acquired by Government and that the cess which the plaintiff had claimed was excessive the plaintiffs having claimed cess at the rate of 21/2 annas in the rupee whereas according to the defence it should have been only six pies in the rupee. This defence found favour with the first Court and the trial Judge gave a part-decree to the plaintiffs in accordance with the case for the defence. In appeal, the lower appellate Court set aside the judgment and decree of the Court of first instance and gave a full decree to the plaintiffs. The defendant has come up to this Court in second appeal.2. The first point that arises for consideration is whether the defendant was entitled to a proportionate reduction of the jama. The learned Subordinate Judge could not allow any reduction of th...
Gopeswar Sen and ors. Vs. Burdwanadhipati Maharajadhiraj Bijoy Chand M ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-23-1928
Reported in: AIR1928Cal854,108Ind.Cas.883
Cuming, J.1. The facts of the case out of which this appeal has arisen are briefly these. The landlord applied under Section 105, Ben. Ten. Act for the enhancement of the rent of a certain tenure. In the Record-of-Rights the tenancy had been described as a permanent non-mukurari tenure bearing a jama of Rs. 16-8-7. The defence was that it was a mokurari. tenure and the rent was not liable to be enhanced. The first Court held that the presumption under Section 50, B.T. Act which the defendants had succeeded in establishing had been rebutted.2. The Court fixed Rs. 55 8-0 as the rent of the tenancy. The lower appellate Court upheld this decision.3. The first point that has been urged by the appellant is that if he can prove that he has held at the same rate of rent for 20 years it will be presumed not only that he had held at the same rate of rent but that the tenancy was in existence at the time of the permanent settlement and hence the principles of Section 6, Ben. Ten. Act apply and th...
PulIn Behary Nandi Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-20-1928
Reported in: 115Ind.Cas.96
1. The accused in this case was convicted of an offence under Section 333, Indian Penal Code. The facts shortly are that he was driving a motorlorry belonging to the Corporation through the Entally Middle Road from west to east when a little boy apparently in crossing the road came in contact with the lorry and his left foot was run over and fractured and had to be amputated. The section under which the petitioner has been convicted requires an act to be done so rashly or negligently as to endanger human life or the personal safety of others. It appears to us, on reading the judgments of the two lower Courts and considering the evidence that has been adduced in the case, that it is difficult to say that the case against the accused has fairly been brought within the requirements of that section. It was found that the speed was moderate. It was also found that the petitioner was driving on the correct side of the road. There is also indication that this boy was trying to cross the road ...
Sarat Kumar Roy Vs. Surendra Nath Joardar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-19-1928
Reported in: AIR1928Cal428,108Ind.Cas.587
Cuming, J.1. In the suit out of which this appeal arises the plaintiff sued the defendants to recover arrears of rent from the last two kists of 1326 to pous kist of 1329 at an annual rental of Rs. 34-5-31 pies with cesses and damages. His allegation was that the defendants' father purchased the holding in question on 15th September 1919, at an auction sale and that the defendants had been holding this jama since their father's death. The defendants contested the suit. They raised a number of objections. The only one with which we are concerned in the present appeal is that they claim to be entitled to the suspension of the entire rent on the ground that they have been dispossessed from a large portion of the holding by the landlord.2. The Munsif overruled the objection of the defendants and decreed the suit. In appeal the learned Subordinate Judge found that the defendants had been dispossessed from some portion of the holding and that they were entitled to the suspension of the entir...
Sita Nath Chakravarti Vs. BepIn Behari Chowdhury and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-19-1928
Reported in: 117Ind.Cas.529
1. This case has been well-argued, and we are much obliged to the learned Vakils for the trouble which they have taken. The dispute arises over a tank and it appears that eight annaa of this tank was acquired in the name of one of three Hindu brothers who together form a joint Hindu family. The brother in whose name the property was acquired was Sitanath, the eldest of the three brothers, the names of the others being Dinonath and Chandranath. It appears that this tank was not being assessed to public revenue, and the Government treated it as khas mehal, and the finding was that Sitanath and three other persons, stranger to the family, were in possession, and the Government re-settled the tank upon Sitanath and the three strangers, and thereafter that Sitanath has been paying the jama which was settled to the Government. This took place in 1896. The share of Sitanath in this tank was four annas. In 1915 there was also acquired in the name of Sitanath a further four annas share of this ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »