Kolkata Court August 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.
Utanka Lal Mookerji Vs. Tarak Nath Seal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-15-1928
Reported in: AIR1929Cal11,114Ind.Cas.156
B.B. Ghose, J. 1. This appeal arises out of a final decree made by the Subordinate Judge in a suit on a mortgage. The appeal is by the defendant. The mortgage suit was settled between the parties by a compromise and what is said to be the preliminary decree was passed on 26th May 1916. In that decree it was provided amongst other things that the appellant should pay the decretal amount to the extent of Es. 12,500 within 15 days of the decree and the remainder Rs. 11,500 in certain instalments spreading over several years. The last instalment was said to be payable on 30th Baisakh 1333 B.S. There was a further stipulation that in default of payment of two instalments the whole amount of the balance then remaining due would at once be recoverable. It was stipulated that the mortgage lien would remain intact and the plaintiffs would be entitled to execute the decree by obtaining a final decree with reference to their dues still remaining unpaid. One of the persons named Kali Prosanna Seal...
Nirod Kumar Roy Vs. Raj Lakshmi Dasi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-15-1928
Reported in: AIR1929Cal398
Mallik, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for arrears of rent and also for enhancement of rent under Section 52, Ben. Ten. Act, under Section 30 of the same Act. The plaintiff claimed rent at the rate of Rs. 40 odd including Rs. 11 odd which had been kept in the kabuliyat as hajat. The Courts below gave a decree to the plaintiff for arrears of rent and also for enhancement under Section 52 but refused the plaintiff's claim for an enhancement under Section 30 and also his claim for rent including the amount of hajat. The two points which have been urged before us by the plaintiff-appellant are first, that the plaintiff was entitled to claim rent including the amount of hajat inasmuch as he had the right to withdraw the hajat portion of the rent; and secondly, that the plaintiff was entitled to an enhancement undar.S. 30; inasmuch as the defendants are occupancy raiyats and not tenure-holders as found by the Courts below.2. As regards the hajat point, we are of opinion that the plain...
Sisir Kumar Mallik and ors. Vs. Naran Chandra Mallik and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-15-1928
Reported in: AIR1929Cal548
Garlick, J.1. The facts of the case are these. The plaintiff's grandfather Madu Sudan took Rs. 400 from his relatives Ratneswar Mallik and Guru Dayal Mallik and executed in their favour a dead of sale of about 24 bighas of land. The deed was executed in the name of their benamdar Gopi Nath Sarkar. At the same time Gopi Nath executed in favour of Madu Sudan an ekrarnama in which the fact of sale was recited and it was agreed that if Madu Sudan repaid Rs. 400 at any time the property would be reconveyed to him. In pursuance of this arrangement the purchaser had possession of the land for nearly sixty years. The document was executed in January 1862. In 1918 the plaintiffs claimed the right to redeem the property by repaying Rs. 400. The original parties to the transaction were all dead. Six of the descendants of the original purchasers consented to reconvey their shares of the property to the plaintiffs. Six others refused to do so. Defendants 7 to 12 are those who did execute a deed of ...
Soorath Nath Banerjee Vs. Bhabasankar Goswami and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-15-1928
Reported in: AIR1929Cal547
Page, J.1. This is a suit brought to recover royalties or rent due under a mining lease. The defence which was urged before us in this appeal was that the lease was void under Section 20, Contract Act, which reads as follows:Where both the parties to an agreement are under a mistake as to a matter of fact essential to an agreement the agreement is void.2. The question that falls for determination is whether having regard to the facts proved in this case, the defendant could sustain such a defence. It appears from the evidence of the defendant himself that he had acquired possession of certain plots in this mauza with a view to being in a position to enable an assignee from him to carry on mining operations. There is no finding and it does not appear from the terms of the patta that it was intended by the parties to the patta that the colliery should actually be situate on the land which was the subject-matter of the lease and under the terms of the lease, if the defendant at any time s...
Nirode Kumar Roy Vs. Srimati Raj Lakshml Dasi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-15-1928
Reported in: 120Ind.Cas.145
Mallik, J.1. This appeal arises out of a Suit for arrears of rent and also for enhancement of rent under Section 52 of the Bengal Tenancy Act and under Section 30 of the same Act. The plaintiff claimed rent at the rate of Rs. 40 odd including Rs. 11 odd which had been kept in the kabuliyat as hajat. The Courts below gave a decree to the plaintiff for arrears of rent and also for enhancement under Section 52, but refused the plaintiff's claim for an enhancement under Section 30 and also his claim for rent including the amount of hajat. The two points which have been urged before us by the plaintiff-appellant are, first, that the plaintiff was entitled to claim rent including the amount of hajat inasmuch as he had the right to withdraw the hajat portion of the rent; and, secondly, that the plaintiff was entitled to an enhancement under Section 30, inasmuch as the defendant is an occupancy raiyat and not a tenure holder as found by the Courts below.2. As regards the hajat point, we are of...
Harendra Kumar Rai Choudhuri and ors. Vs. Secy. of State and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-1928
Reported in: AIR1928Cal808
Page, J.1. The plaintiffs are 7 annas and odd cosharers in a zemindari, and 16 annas putnidars under the zemindars. Certain lands have accreted to the Zemindari, and diarah proceedings were taken by the Government for the purpose of the resumption and settlement of the accreted lands, and the assessment thereof with revenue under Regulation 7 of 1822 and 1 of 1825, Act 31 of 1858, Act 9 of 1847, and Ch. 10, Ben. Ten. Act. The zemindars refused to take settlement of the accreted lands, and were granted malikana in respect thereof. The Government then took khas possession of the accretions, and in the Record-of-Eights the plaintiffs are recorded as the tenants of the separate diarah mahals Nos. 13618, 13116, which had been formed out of the accreted lands. Thereafter five certificates under the Public Demands Recovery Act (3 of 1913) were issued and notices were served upon the plaintiffs for the recovery of arrears of rent and cesses alleged to be due from them as tenants of these diara...
Macneil and Co. Vs. Saroda Sundari Debi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-1928
Reported in: AIR1929Cal83,114Ind.Cas.142
Bose, J.1. The Appeal No. 10 of 1926 arises out of Title Suit No. 15 of 1923 and the Appeal No. 102 of 1926, arises out of Suit No. 1 of 1924. Both the Suits Nos. 15 of 1923 and 1 of 1924 were tried together by the Subordinate Judge, 2nd Court, Hooghly. The properties in dispute originally belonged to Earn Chand Chatterji. The following short genealogical table will be of use in understanding the facts of the case: Ram Chand Ghatterjee | Prasanna Kumar died in 1885. Wife Saroda Sundari Debi Plaintifi 2. | ______________________________________ | | | Debendra Nath Surendra Nath Rajendra Plaintifi 1 Defendant 3 Died un- married in 18992. Each of the brothers Debendra, Surendra and Rajendra inherited 1/3 share and on the death of Rajendra their mother Saroda Sundari, plaintiff 2 inherited his 1/3 share.3. Defendant 2 Messrs. Macneil & Co., with a view to construct mills began to acquire lands in the village of Bansberiah and the neighbouring villages. Defendant 1 Babu Pran Krishna Chatter...
B.N. Ry. Co. Ltd. Vs. Moolji Sicka and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-1928
Reported in: AIR1929Cal654
Mitter, J.1. This rule was obtained by the Bengal Nagpur Railway Company, Limited, for the revision of a judgment of the Small Cause Court Judge of Sealdah by which the defendant company were made liable in an action brought by the plaintiffs opposite party for recovery of compensation from the defendant company on account of damage to some goods booked from Tirosa Station to the Shalimar Station belonging to the defendant company. The case made by the plaintiffs opposite party is that out of a large number of bags of Biri consigned from Tirosa, 11 bags were found to have been damaged by wet and the allegation is that this was due to the fault of the defendant's servants and consequently plaintiffs were entitled to recover damages. It is necessary in particular to refer to para. 3 of the plaint upon which some argument has been advanced before me. Para. 3 of the plaint runs as follows:That it was ascertained on enquiry that the said damage was due to the consignment having been evident...
The Bengal Nagpur Railway Company, Limited Vs. Moolji Sicka and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-1928
Reported in: 122Ind.Cas.625
Mitter, J.1. This Rule was obtained by the Bengal Nagpur Railway Company Limited, for the revision of a judgment of the Small Cause Court Judge of Sealdah by which the defendant Company were made liable in an action brought by the plaintiffs opposite party for recovery of compensation from the defendant Company on account of damage to some goods booked from Tirosa Station to the Shalimar Station belonging to the defendant Company. The case made by the plaintiffs-opposite party is that out of a large number of bags of biri consigned from Tirosa, eleven bags were found to have been damaged by wet and the allegation is that this was due to the fault of the defendants' servants and consequently plaintiffs were entitled to recover damages. It is necessary in particular to refer to para. 3 of the plaint upon which some argument has been advanced before me. Paragraph 3 of the plaint runs as follows: ''That it was ascertained on enquiry that the said damage was due to the consignment having be...
Daksha Bala Dasya Vs. Raja Mondal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-13-1928
Reported in: AIR1929Cal127
Suhrawardy, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of bargah produce for the years 1324 to 1327 against the under-raiyat. The plaintiff's allegations are that the jama originally belonged to Alokemani Baishnabi who bequeathed it to the plaintiff's husband Shama Charan by a will of which probate was duly taken The plaintiff as successor of Shama Charan thereupon sued the defendant who is an under raiyat for lent The defendant denied the relation of landlord and tenant on the ground that neither the plaintiff nor her husband was ever in possession of the jarna He also took exception to the quantity and the price of the bargah produce claimed The learned Munsif who tried the suit overruled the defendant's objections except with regard to issue 2 and gave the plaintiff a partial decree. The defendant appealed and the learned Subordinate Judge in deciding the question as to whether the relation of landlord and tenant existed between the parties raised the point as to whether Alo...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »