Kolkata Court February 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.
Kanto Mohan Mullick and ors. Vs. Jadab Chandra Khara and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-1928
Reported in: AIR1928Cal353
Mitter, J.1. The suit in which this appeal arises was brought by the plaintiff for recovery of 9annas 12 gds share of rent at the rate of Rs. 7-2-6 per annum. The plaintiff's allegation is that the rent in 76 annas share is Rs. 11-14-9. The plaintiff claimed rent for the years 1327-30 B.S., with cess and damages. Defendants 1 and 2, who contested the suit, dispute the jama payable by them in the 16 annas share as claimed by the plaintiff and stated that the jama in the 16 annas share was Rs. 8-4 as 161/2 gds. The Court of first instance, on a consideration of the evidence, both oral and documentary, held that the jama payable in plaintiff's share was as claimed by the plaintiff, and that the rent for the period in suit was admittedly in arrears, and decreed the suit with costs against the answering defendants and ex parte against the rest. An appeal was taken by the defendants to the lower appellate Court and the only point for determination before that Court was as to what is the jama...
Mahim Chandra Banikya Vs. Sarafatulla and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-1928
Reported in: 114Ind.Cas.789
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff whose suit for declaration of his title to the property in question was dismissed by both the Courts below. There has been a very unfortunate tangle created by the procedure taken by the plaintiff with reference to the holding which is the subject-matter of the suit. The plaintiff says that he was the owner of the holding. It stood originally in the name of his uncle Hara Kumar, but he is the owner of the entire holding. There were two sets of landlords and those who are alleged to have 8 annas share granted the plaintiff some dakhilas in his own name. The other set of landlords are defendants Nos. 3 to 8 in this case in whose sherista the name of Hara Kumar still stands. The defendants Nos. 3 to 8 obtained a decree for rent against Hara Kumar and put the entire holding to sale and it has been purchased by themselves. Thereupon the plaintiff brought this suit for declaration of his title and also for declaration that the rent-decree which the defen...
Abdul Alim Abed and anr. Vs. Mt. Abir Jan Bibi and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-13-1928
Reported in: AIR1928Cal368,110Ind.Cas.416
Suhrawardy, J.1. This rule is directed against an order of the District Judge of 24 Parganas dated 6fch November 1927, by which he dismissed an application by the petitioners to appoint them as mutwallis of a wakf estate, The facts are that a wakf was created by the ancestor of petitioner 1. Under the deed of wakfnama, the opposite party would be the present mutwalli and after him the petitioner 1. The petitioner's case is that the opposite party parted with some of the wakf properties treating them as secular and thereupon he brought a suit against them in the local Subordinate Judge's Court and obtained a decree declaring the properties as wakf. On the3e facts he asked the Judge to appoint a mutwalli in the exercise of the powers of a kazi under the Mahomedan law. Opposite party 1, repudiates the wakf and her case is that the alleged wakf was only a paper transaction and that she never acted as mutwalli; on the other hand she treated the properties as her own properties inherited fro...
Satindra Nath Sen Gupta Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-10-1928
Reported in: AIR1928Cal438
1. This is a rule granted to the petitioner Satindra Nath Sen Gupta on certain grounds mentioned in the petition. Proceedings were taken under Section 107, Criminal P.C., against the petitioner on 18th March last by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Barisal and after hearing the evidence the Sub-Divisional Magistrate directed him to execute a bond of Rs. 5,000 with two sureties of Rs. 2,500 each to keep the peace for one year. On appeal to the learned Sessions Judge the order requiring security was upheld but the amount of the bond was reduced to Rs. 500, together with two sureties of Rs. 250 each.2. The facts found by the learned Sessions Judge in concurrence with the Sub-Divisional Magistrate are that the petitioner is the leader of the Satyagraha movement in the district of Bakerganj, the object of which is to enforce the right of the Hindus to lead processions with music before mosques on public highways at all times. The assertion of such a right, to use the words of the learned Ju...
Mahommad HosseIn Choudhury Vs. Khana Kazi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-10-1928
Reported in: AIR1928Cal606
Mitter, J.1. This is a plaintiff landlord's appeal against the decision of the Subordinate Judge of Dacca dated 9th April 1925 affirming the decision of the Munsif of Manikgunj dated 2nd October 1923. The plaintiff commenced the suit in which this appeal arises for rent and claimed arrears of rent at the rate of Bs. 17-1-31 gandas. Defendant 2, now respondent, who alone contested the suit pleaded that the rental was Rs. 10-0-15 gds. and that the rent was liable to be suspended on the ground of partial dispossession. So far as the defence of suspension of rent is concerned, both the lower Courts overruled the objection taken by the defendant, but gave effect to the plea that the plaintiff was not ?entitled to more than Rs. 10-0-15 gds. The ground on which the defendant rested his defence which had prevailed in both the Courts below that the plaintiff is not entitled to a higher rent than Rs. 10-0-15 gds. is that the previous compromise decree between the plaintiff and the defendant was ...
Rajjab Ali and ors. Vs. Miajan and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-10-1928
Reported in: AIR1928Cal830,110Ind.Cas.638
Cuming, J.1. This appeal arises oat of a suit for partition. The case of the plaintiffs was that many years ago some seven persons of whom the plaintiffs represented, three took a lease of a large area of land within certain boundaries from the Maharaja of Tipperah. The parties remained in possession of distinct portions of the land by private arrangement for the sake of convenience, but that there was no regular partition of the demised land. Now, they asked that the land should be partitioned. The case of the defendants was that the lands had all. along been partitioned Now, it appears, that the actual amount of the lands purported to be demised by the patta granted by the Maharaja was some 32:. kanis of land. It is apparently the case, of both the parties that some 12 kanis. out of the demised land was sold and that they remained in possession of the remaining 20 kanis, settlement operations had since taken place and the parties were found to be in possession of some 1712 acres of l...
Mahim Chandra Roy Vs. A.H. Watson
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-10-1928
Reported in: AIR1929Cal191
1. Certain imputations against the Indian widows appeared in an English daily the ' Statesman ' on 12th August 1927. A petition of complaint was filed against the editor and printer A.H. Watson alleging that the imputations were false, malicious, and grossly defamatory and had lowered the complainant's reputation as he had several relations who were widows. The Magistrate sue motu dismissed the complaint giving reasons therefor. A petition for further enquiry into the complaint was dismissed by the Sessions Judge.2. The complainant thereupon moved the High Court and obtained the present rule the sixth ground of which was:that the learned Magistrate was wrong in law in dismissing the petition of complaint without giving an opportunity to the petitioner to substantiate the charge by adducing evidence.Chotzner, J.3. We are of opinion after hearing the learned vakil for the petitioner that this rule should be made absolute on the sixth ground specified in the petition. We, therefore, remit...
Bejoy Chand Mahatab Vs. Gurupada Haldar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-10-1928
Reported in: 117Ind.Cas.842
B.B. Ghose, J.1. This is an appeal by the claimant No. 6 against the judgment and decree of the District Judge acting as the Special Land Acquisition Judge on a reference made by the Collector under the Land Acquisition Act as to the apportionment of the compensation paid with regard to the acquisition of certain lands in the suburbs of Calcutta. The claimant No. 6 who was described as the plaintiff in the Court below prayed for the compensation with regard to a certain area of the lands acquired which has now been found to be about 10 cottas as against the claimants Nos. 1 to 5, who had been described as the defendants in the Court below. The real contesting parties were claimants Nos. 1 and 2. Claimant No, 1 claimed to be the owner of the lands in lakheraj right and claimant No. 2, who is the wife of claimant No. 1, claimed the property in her right as mourashi mokurrari holder under her husband, the claimant No. 1. The Collector awarded the entire amount of compensation to the claim...
Mahommad HusaIn Choudhury Vs. Khana Kazi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-10-1928
Reported in: 113Ind.Cas.570
Mitter, J.1. This is a plaintiff landlord's appeal against the decision of the Subordinate Judge of Dacca, dated 9th April, 1925, affirming the decision of the Munsif of Manikgunj, dated 2nd October, 1923. The plaintiff commenced the suit in which this appeal arises for rent and claimed arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 17-1- 3 1/2 gandas. Defendant No. 2, now respondent, who alone contested the suit pleaded that the rental was Rs. 10 0-15 gandas and that the rent was liable to be suspended on the ground of partial dispossession. So far as the defence of suspension of rent is concerned, both the lower Courts overruled the objection taken by the defendant, but gave effect to the plea that the plaintiff was not entitled to more than Rs. 10-0-15 gandas. The ground on which the defendant rested his defence which had prevailed in both the Courts below that the plaintiff is not entitled to a higher rent than Rs. 10-0-15 gandas. is that the previous compromise decree between the plaintiff an...
Aghore Nath Haldar Vs. Dwijapada Chatterjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-09-1928
Reported in: AIR1928Cal832
Page, J.1. The issue raised in this appeal involves the construction of the term persons occupying holdings' in Section 85(a), Bangal Municipal Act 3 of 1881. The appellant is the Headmaster of the English High School at Jangipur. From October 1921-23 he resided in a boarding house or hostel for students adjoining the school buildings, but the school building and the hostel for the purposes of the Bengil Municipal Act are, and are to be treated as, separate-holdings. The hostel belongs to the School Committee, and its internal affairs are managed by a Superintendent. Persons who are accepted as boarders are entitled to reside in the hostel only if, and so long as they conform to the rules and regulations of the institution. The hostel exists primarily for students, but the appellant obtained permission to reside therein as a boarder upon the usual terms, and became entitled to occupy a seat or bed in one of the rooms on the upper storey and to partake of the meals supplied in the hoste...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »