Kolkata Court March 1928 Judgments
Mohun Lal Kundu Vs. Nanibala Dabee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-30-1928
Reported in: AIR1929Cal207
Pearson, J.1. The applicant is the purchaser of certain property at a Registrar's sale, and seeks to have the sale set aside and the deposit refunded.2. The property in question is No. 48/5, Boloram Dey Street. This was purchased in September 1912 in the name of one Nanibala Dabi, the wife of Mani Haldar. On 22nd May 1922 Mani Haldar and Nanibala borrowed moneys from plaintiff on mortgage of the property. On 10th June 1923 Mani borrowed certain money from one Durlava Sett upon a promissory note. This debt was assigned by Durlava Sett to one Satya Srimani who obtained a decree against Mani Haldar on 28th August 1924 in suit No. 2106 of 1924. On 8th September 1924 Satya Srimani in execution obtained an order for attachment of this property, and on 11th September 1924 the Sheriff attached the property. On 8th Nov. 1924 Nanibala instituted claim proceedings.3. On 16th November 1925 the plaintiff filed a suit on the mortgage.4. On 12th January 1926 Nanibala's claim was dismissed. The prelim...
Tag this Judgment!Mohunlal Kundu Vs. Nanibala Dabee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-30-1928
Reported in: 118Ind.Cas.887
Pearson, J.1. The applicant is the purchaser of certain property at a Registrar's sale, and seeks to have the sale set aside and the deposit refunded.2. The property in question is No. 48 5, Boloram Dey Street. This was purchased in September, 1912, in the name of one Nanibala Dabi, the wife of Mani Haldar On 22nd May, 1922, Mani Haldar and Nanibala borrowed moneys from plaintiff on mortgage of the property. On 10th June-1923, Mani borrowed certain money from one Durlava Sett upon a promissory note. This debt was assigned by Durlava Sett to one Satya Srimani who obtained a decree against Mani Haldar on 28th August, 1924, in suit No 2106 of 1924. On 8th September, 1924, Satya Srimani in execution obtained an order for attachment of this property, and on 11th September. 1924, the Sheriff attached the property. On 8th November, 1924, Nanibala instituted claim proceedings.3. On 16th November, 1925, the plaintiff filed a suit on the mortgage.4. On 12th January, 1926, Nanibala's claim was di...
Tag this Judgment!Jyoti Prosad Singha Deo Bahadur Vs. Jogendra Ram Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-29-1928
Reported in: AIR1928Cal878
Mitter, J.1. This is a reference under the Court-fees Act. The facts which have given rise to this reference may be briefly stated as follows : The plaintiff, who is the appellant before this Court, filed a suit for partition in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Asansole. There was a preliminary decree and ultimately there was a final decree on 30th July 1926, and the plaintiff-appellant, was awarded the costs of commission as against certain of the defendants. His costs of the commission were, however, not embodied in the decree. These costs amounted to Rs. 1573-5-9. Against that order amending the decree the defendants now respondents, moved the Subordinate Judge on 21st December 1927 rescinding his previous order of 4th June 1927 so far as it related to the costs of the commission. He then directed that the direction of payment of costs of the commission to the plaintiff be deleted from the decree. Against this decree as finally amended the plaintiff has preferred the present ap...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Yunus Ali and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-29-1928
Reported in: 117Ind.Cas.680
Cuming, J.1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Comilla under Section 307 in the case of three persons Yunus Ali, Abdul Waheb and Rahamannessa. They were all three charged under two counts: (1) that on or about the 26th of January, 1927, at Mudafar they conspired to murder one Aliban and so committed an offence under Section 120B read with Section 302 : (2) that on or about the same day at the same place they did murder Aliban and so committed an offence punishable under Section 302, Indian Penal Code. At the trial the learned Judge held that there was not a scrap of legal evidence that these persons did murder Aliban and he directed them to find a verdict of not guilty on that charge which they did. With regard to the charge of conspiracy the Jury by a majority of 5 to 2 found all the accused not guilty. The Judge disagreed with the verdict holding they should be found guilty of conspiracy. One difficulty at once arises in my mind on the facts as alleged and proved, ...
Tag this Judgment!Ajgar Shaik and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-28-1928
Reported in: AIR1928Cal700
Cuming, J.1. This is an appeal by three persons Ajgar Shaikh, Soleman Shaikh and Ekabbar Shaikh. They were trie d by the learned Sessions Judge of Khulna with the aid of a jury. The jury found Ajgar and Soleman guilty under Section 326 and also under Section 447, I.P.C. The learned Judge sentenced Ajgar to one year's rigorous imprisonment under Section 326 and Soleman to six months rigorous imprisonment under Section 326. The jury also found Ekabbar guilty under Sections 323 and 447, I.P.C. The learned Judge sentenced him to six weeks rigorous imprisonment under Section 323. The learned Judge sentenced all the three appellants to one month's rigorous imprisonment under Section 447, I.P.C. The sentences under Section 447 in the case of all the accused persons were to run con-currently with the sentence under Sections 326 and 323, I.P.C.2. The facts very briefly are these: There are three brothers Bahadur, Sadeq and Kabiladdi, who live in the same or adjacent homestead. Bahadur is the fa...
Tag this Judgment!Ajgar Shaikh and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-28-1928
Reported in: 117Ind.Cas.596
Cuming, J.1. This is an appeal by three persons Ajgar Shaikh, Soleman Shaikh and Ekabbar Shaikh. They were tried by the learned Sessions Judge of Khulna with the aid of a Jury. The Jury found Ajgar and Soleman guilty under Section 326 and also under Section 447, Indian Penal Code. The learned Judge sentenced Ajgar to one year's rigorous imprisonment under Section 326 and Soleman to six months' rigorous imprisonment under Section 326. The Jury also found Ekabbar guilty under Sections 323 and 447, Indian Penal Code. The learned Judge sentenced him to six weeks' rigorous imprisonment under Section 323. The learned Judge sentenced all the three appellants to one month's rigorous imprisonment under Section 447 Indian Penal Code. The sentences under Section 447, in the case of all the accused persons were to run concurrently with the sentences under Sections 326 and 323, Indian Penal Code.2. The facts very briefly are these: There are three brothers Bahadur, Sadeq and Kabiladdi, who live in ...
Tag this Judgment!Corporation of Calcutta Vs. Ananta Dhar and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-27-1928
Reported in: AIR1928Cal336
Rankin, C.J.1. In this case a rule was issued at the instance of the Corporation of Calcutta requiring the opposite party to show cause why a certain order of acquittal passed by the Municipal Magistrate in favour of the opposite party should not be set aside on the ground that the Magistrate had misconcieved the law and acquitted the accused on an erroneous hypothesis and assumption.2. It appears that the opposite party is the owner of a hut consisting of certain premises in Calcutta and that after the commencement of the Calcutta Municipal Act of 1925 he put new golpatta leaves upon the old framework of the roof of his hut. He was accordingly prosecuted under Rule 7, Schedule 17, Municipal Act, the Clause 1, whereof says that external roof of walls of buildings shall not, after the commencement of this Act, be made of grass, leaves, mats, canvas or other inflammable materials.3. It appears that the charge against him on that occasion was that he had entirely re-thatched the roof of t...
Tag this Judgment!Santasila Dasi Vs. Narendra Nath Pal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-27-1928
Reported in: AIR1929Cal290,121Ind.Cas.570
Costello, J.1. This is an application for the grant of probate of the will of one Surendra Nath Pal, who died on 30th April 1927. The will is dated 15th July 1923, and was therefore made more than four years before the death of the testator. 2. By that will the testator made certain dispositions of his property and he left the whole of the residue of it to his widow whom he appointed to be the executrix of that will. When the widow applied for probate of the will in the ordinary course a caveat was entered by a brother of the deceased (named Narendra Nath Pal) who filed an affidavit alleging that his brother was at the time he made the will and up to the time of his death a man of weak intellect and had a very imperfect knowledge of English. He also alleged in effect in his affidavit that the will was procured by the undue influence of the widow. But there was a still more serious allegation in the affidavit in that the caveator contended, or at any rate, stated that the will was not g...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Harmukhrai Dulichand
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-26-1928
Reported in: AIR1928Cal587,114Ind.Cas.90
Rankin, C.J.1. In this case the Commissioner of Income-tax has referred two points of law to this Court for its opinion under Section 66, Income-tax Act (11 of 1922). Before setting out the form of the question it may be as well to premise that the assessees in this case are a firm called Messrs. Harmukhrai Dulichand.2. It appears that on 4th May 1926, an- ordinary notice was served upon them under Clause (2), Section 22, requiring them to render a return of their income for the purpose of income-tax. It appears that the year by which this firm goes in maintaining its books of account is the Dewali year and the year of assessment was 1982-83, the previous year or the year of accounting being, therefore, 1981-82. On 22nd July 1926 a notice under Section 22(4) was served upon them asking: that they should produce their books of account for the Dewali year 1980-81 and 1981-82 and on 6th August 1926, the assessees submitted a return. The return which they submitted consists of the words an...
Tag this Judgment!Sibesh Chandra Pakrashi Vs. Bibi Bhusan Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-26-1928
Reported in: AIR1928Cal750
1. This is an appeal by the defendant from a decision of the Subordinate Judge of Pabna dated 26th January 1926 which affirmed the decision of the Munsif of Serajgunj, dated 9th May 1925. The suit in which this appeal arises was for setting aside the election of defendant 1 who was elected as a member of the Serajgunj Local Board and for an injunction restraining him from taking his seat as a member of the said Board. The main ground on which the plaintiff came to Court seams to be this, that one Tarak Chandra Banerji proposed the plaintiff as a candidate for election. Objection was taken by defendant 1 to Tarak's proposing the plaintiff as a candidate for the election, as it was said that Tarak was not a qualified voter. This objection of defendant 1 seems to have prevailed with the presiding officer. The plaintiff was also duly seconded by another qualified voter and that seconder also was held by the presiding officer not qualified to vote. The result was that the name of the plaint...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »