Kolkata Court January 1929 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.
idol Sree Brindaban Chandra Thakup Jiu by His Shebait Hari Prosanna Ba ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-18-1929
Reported in: 120Ind.Cas.149
Mukerji, J.1. This appeal has been preferred from the decree of the Subordinate Judge of Burdwan affirming on appeal that passed by the Munsif, fourth Court, Burdwan. The appeal arises out of a suit for rent. The plaintiff instituted the suit for rent for recovery of paddy rent for two years, namely, 1330 and 1331 at the rate of two Maps one Sali of paddy per annum with cesses and damages. The suit was instituted on the allegation that the defendant's tenancy consisted of two plots of land. The defence set up was that of the two plots,--Nos. 1 and 2 mentioned in the plaint, No. 2 did not form a part of the tenancy but a different plot of which the plaintiff was in possession of a part of it instead, and so the rent should be suspended. It was also pleaded on behalf or the defence that under an arrangement between the parties the defendant was in possession of plot No. 1 only for which he had to pay only half the rent. The trial Court held that plot No. 2 of the plaint did not appertain...
Ram Golam Singh Vs. Sarat Chandra Ganguly and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-1929
Reported in: AIR1929Cal281,121Ind.Cas.414
Suhrawardy, J.1. This rule was issued to show cause why the order complained of in the petition should not be set aside and the petitioner's complaint directed to be taken up and proceeded with in accordance with law. What happened was that there was a collision between the parties on 6th September 1928, which resulted in the petitioner's filing a complaint before the Magistrate against the opposite party under Sections 147, 447, 352, etc., I.P.C., and the opposite party making a similar complaint against the petitioner for similar offences. After recording the petitioner's complaint the trying Magistrate looked into the counter case in which the information was first loged with the police and as he found that there were injuries on some persons of the opposite party he directed that the case of the opposite party should proceed and deferred passing any order on the petitioner's complaint. The petitioner moved unsuccessfully before the Sessions Judge and he now contends that he should ...
Bireswar Bandopadhya and ors. Vs. Jogendra Nath Chakrabarty and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-1929
Reported in: AIR1929Cal413
1. The suits out of which appeals Nos. 31, 33, 34, and 35 have arisen were 'commenced by the tenants praying for abatement of rent on the-ground of decrease in area of the tenures covered by the suits on account of diluvion. The first Court held that the plaintiffs tenants had been able to prove that the area in each case, for which rent had been previously paid by them was larger than the area in their possession at the time of the commencement of the suits and that the deficiency in the area was due to diluvion. The learned Munsifi stated that there was no document forth-' coming from which the original area, that is, the area at the time of the in- -option of the tenancy could be found out and that there were no materials whatsoever, on the record by which the axtent of the original area of the tenures could be traced. He also stated that the plaintiffs had been able to produce before him the Record-of-Rights which showed that the recorded area in the possession of the plaintiffs at...
Radhakissen Dhanuba Vs. Bombay Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Cal51,121Ind.Cas.574
Lort-Williams, J.1. In this case the defendants ask for stay of a suit pending in the Calcutta Court of Small Causes, in which the plaintiffs claim the sum of Rs. 92-8-0 as an allowance arising out of a written contract, which contains an agreement to refer all disputes to arbitration.2. Section 89(1), Civil P.C. is as follows:Save in so far as is otherwise provided by the Indian Arbitration Act, 1899 or by any other law for the time being in force, all reference to arbitration whether by an order in a suit or otherwise, and all proceedings thereunder, shall be governed by the provisions contained in Schedule 2and para. 18 of Schedule 2 provides that an application to stay a suit must be made to the Court at the earliest possible opportunity. It is clear that this para has been adapted from Section 19, Arbitration Act 1899, which itself was as clearly adapted from Section 4, English Arbitration Act 1889. The Para and Sections are as follows:Para. 18Where any party to any agreement to r...
Debendra Narayan Chakravarty Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-1929
Reported in: AIR1929Cal244
Rankin, C.J.1. In this case the accused man was put on his trial before the learned Sessions Jndge of Murshidabad and a jury of five upon a charge that about midday on 14th April 1928, he committed culpable homicide by killing his wife. The wife's name was Kiranbala and it would appear that she was a mere girl of some 15 years of age. She had been married to the accused since about 1924.2. Now the evidence on the part of the prosecution consists first of all of a considerable amount of evidence to the effect that the accused used from time to time to ill-treat his wife. There is a certain amount of evidence but not of a character which can be said to be in any way substantial to the effect that the accused man was carrying on an intrigue with the widow of an uncle who lived next door and that this might have had something to do with the animosity between the husband and the wife. There is some further evidence as to which it is a matter of opinion whether it is substantial or not to th...
Ansarali Vs. Bhim Sankar Dutta Tewari and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-1929
Reported in: AIR1929Cal407a
Mukerji, J.1. This Rule has been issued to show cause why the order of the Subordinate Judge of Noakhali, dated 8th May 1928, refusing to entertain an appeal should not be set aside, or why such other or further order should not be made as to this Court may seem fit and proper.2. The facts necessary to be stated are these. There was an application under Order 21, Rule 90, Civil P.C. filed by the petitioner in the Court of Munsif at Sudhara. On the day fixed for the hearing of this application neither of the parties appeared before the Court with the result that the said application was dismissed for default. Against that order the petitioner preferred an appeal which came up before the Subordinate Judge of Noakhali, and he on 8th May 1928 dismissed the appeal holding that from the order passed by the Munsif no appeal lay tinder the law. , It is against this order of the learned Subordinate Judge that the present rule is directed.3. The question as to whether an order dismissing an appl...
Pramatha Nath Basu Vs. Ganga Charan Chakravarty
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-11-1929
Reported in: AIR1929Cal340
C.C. Ghose, J.1. I have examined the record in this case and have perused with attention the opinions of the differing Judges. As far as I know, the practice of this Court has been not to interfere on petitions of private complainants praying for enhancement of the sentence passed on the accused. It will not be understood from what I have just said that the High Court has not the power to interfere on the application of a private complainant The powers of the High Court are extremely wide. But it is an elementary proposition that wider the power, the more cautious must be the exercise of that power and, in the cautious exercise of that power, it has been laid down by eminent Judges from time to time that it is a safe working rule not to interfere on petitions for enhancement of sentences passed on accused persons made on behalf of private complainants. Bat the position in this case is this : the present application is not for the issue of a Rule calling upon the accused to show cause w...
Ram Krishna Kulasi and anr. Vs. Heramba Chandra Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-08-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Cal207
1. This is an appeal by the mortgagee against the decree of the Subordinate Judge, Second Court, Midnapur, partially rejecting his claim on a mortgage bond. The mortgage bond was executed by the father of defendants 1 to 5 for Rs. 8,000 in the year 1920. The stipulation was to pay interest at the rate of Re. 1 per month with yearly rests. The plaintiffs brought the suit for the mortgage money including interest in terms of the bond. The Subordinate Judge reduced the interest on the ground that the stipulation to pay compound interest with yearly rests is excessive and unfair. His reason for so holding was that the security was ample and the property was valuable, the plaintiff himself having offered to purchase it for Rs. 27,000. It was proved that the defendant had considerable properties, although he had other debts. The Subordinate Judge made a decree for simple interest at the rate of one per cent per month. The plaintiff has appealed against that decree and his contention is that ...
Manindra Chandra Nandy Vs. Lalmohun Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-08-1929
Reported in: AIR1929Cal358
Rankin, C.J.1. This was a suit by the trustees of a deed of arrangement for the benefit of the creditors which was executed by defendants 1 and 2 on 1st April 1921 and in connexion with which an agreement was executed one or two days before between certain creditors and the trustees. The proceedings began by way of originating summons taken out by the trustees of the deed against the debtors only. That originating summons was taken out in July 1921. By an order made in the matter, on 18th December 1924 the plaint presented together with the originating summons under the rules of the High Court as they stood before 1926 was directed to be treated as a, plaint in the ordinary sense. When that, action came on for disposal it was ordered on 9th July 1925 that it be adjourned to enable the plaintiff to implead various, mortgagees. Under this order the plaintiff impleaded first of all certain persons, who had mortgages upon the properties comprised in the deed of arrangement which were prior...
Maharaja Manindra Chandra Nandy Vs. Lalmohun Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-08-1929
Reported in: 120Ind.Cas.577
George Claus Rankin, C.J.1. This was a suit by the trustees of the deed of arrangement for the benefit of the creditors which was executed by defendants Nos. 1 and 2 on the 1st April, 1921 and in connection with which an agreement was executed one or two days before between certain creditors and the trustee. The proceedings began by way of originating summons taken out by the trustees of the deed against the debtors only. That originating summons was taken out in July 1924. By an order made in the matter, on the 18th December, 1924, the plaint presented together with the originating summons under the Rules of the High Court as they stood before 1926, was directed to be treated as a plaint in the ordinary sense. When that action came on for disposal, it was ordered, on the 9th July, 1925, that it be adjourned to enable the plaintiff to implead various mortgagees. Under this order, the plaintiff impleaded first of all certain persons who had mortgages upon the properties comprised in the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »