Kolkata Court May 1929 Judgments
BipIn Chandra Majumdar Vs. Raj Kumar Sinha and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-31-1929
Reported in: AIR1929Cal645,125Ind.Cas.101
Mitter, J.1. These two appeals arise out of the same suit. They are preferred by defendants 1 and 2 separately. The suit in which these two appeals arise was brought by the plaintiffs for recovery of arrears of rent of their eight annas share at the rate of Rs. 8 and odd for the years 1327 to the Pous kist of 1330 B. S. The claim was laid at less than Rs. 50. Defendants 1 and 2 appeared and said that they were not liable for the rent of this period as defendant 1 had made a gift of this property in favour of his sister one Basanta Kumari Sur who is defendant 3 in the present litigation so far back as 2nd Chait 1321 B. S. The defence of defendant 2 was that he sold his interest in the tenure to one Omar Ali who is defendant 4 in the present suit on 26th Sravan 1319 B. S. The Munsif held that the two transfers by way of gift and sale respectively were colourable transactions and that consequently defendants 1 and 2 were liable to the plaintiffs for the rent. The suit was accordingly decr...
Tag this Judgment!Amir Khan and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-31-1929
Reported in: 122Ind.Cas.557
1. In this matter the point that has been taken arises upon the procedure adopted for the constitution of the Jury. The original charge was under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The order-sheet of the Sessions Judge, dated the 30th of October, 1928, runs thus: 'Cards of the Jurors summoned are put in a bag. As the names are called out by lot, five Jurors are found absent. Seven other Jurors named on the reverse are selected by lot without any objection by the accused and Pleader.' We have ascertained that the number of Jurors actually summoned were fourteen in number. The position then was that of these fourteen Jurors five were found absent leaving, therefore, nine. Thus the seven other Jurors named on the reverse were selected by lot and the Jury so empanelled formed the Jury for the trial.2. It is contended that the trial is vitiated because the Jury has not been properly constituted under the existing provisions of the law. This contention rests on the construction to be plac...
Tag this Judgment!Gangaya Narottam Shastry Vs. Ardeshar Dinashaw
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-30-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Cal85
B.B. Ghose, J.1. This is an appeal arising out of a suit on a mortgage. The learned Subordinate Judge has in this suit on a simple mortgage entered into an elaborate discussion as to the matter of an agreement previous to the mortgage between the parties, by which the plaintiff acted as the managing agent of some business carried on by the defendant; and by entering into an elaborate discussion as to the accounts of the managing agency the learned Subordinate Judge held that the suit on the mortgage was not maintainable. The mortgage-deed is to be found at p. 59, Vol. 'A' of the paper book. It is a mortgage bond for money advanced and for future advances to be made to the defendant up to a certain amount for the purpose of carrying on the business. The money actually advanced before the date of the mortgage was Rs. 14,400 odd, and after that date the future advances, according to the plaintiff's evidence, was Rs. 10,700, although the plaintiff stated in his plaint that it was something...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Hamid and ors. Vs. Eakub Ali Pandit and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-30-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Cal315
Rankin, C.J.1. In this case, the appeal is brought from a judgment and decree of my learned brother Mitter, J. sitting in second appeal. The case is this : The plaintiff brought his suit to eject the defendants on the footing that the defendants were under-raiyats to whom notice to quit had been given. The suit was brought under Section 49-B, Ben'. Ten. Act.2. The view taken by the Munsiff was that the service of notice to quit was proved. He also dealt with a defence to the effect that the defendants were-persons who had acquired by custom an occupancy right, notwithstanding that they were only under-raiyats and not raiyats. On that point, the Record-of-Rights was in favour of the defendants. It was finally published in the year 1918. The Munsiff held that the evidence adduced before him was sufficient to disprove the Record-of-Rights and that there was enough to enable him to say that the entry that the defendants had occupancy right was erroneous.3. The matter went on appeal to the ...
Tag this Judgment!Digendra Behari Roy and ors. Vs. Janaki Nath Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-30-1929
Reported in: AIR1929Cal646
ORDER1. These two rules relate to two orders one of which is dated 9th January 1929 and the other dated 10th January 1929 relating to a considerable area of char lands. These lands became the subject-matter of proceedings under Section 145, Criminal P.C., some months previously. The proceedings were drawn up about the beginning of October and at the time of the proceedings being initiated an attachment order was made against the lands. Various steps were taken in those proceedings up to the beginning of January 1929 and on 9th January 1929 the Magistrate passed an order after reviewing the situation at some length as a result of which he directed that the lands should be released from the attachment made in the Section 145 proceedings and decided to replace those proceedings with others under the Bengal Alluvial Lands Act 1920 (Bengal Act 5 of 1920). The way he puts it is this: The land is released from attachment under Section 145, Criminal P.C. It will be attached under the Alluvial ...
Tag this Judgment!Digendra Behary Roy and ors. Vs. Janaki Nath Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-30-1929
Reported in: 125Ind.Cas.737
1. These two Rules relate to two orders one of which is dated the 9th of January, 1929, and the other dated, the 10th of January, 1929, relating to a considerable area of char lands. These lands became the subject-matter of proceedings under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure some months previously. The proceedings were drawn up about the beginning of October and at the time of the proceedings being initiated an attachment order was, made against the lands. Various steps were taken in those proceedings up to the beginning of January 1929 and on the 9th January the Magistrate passed an order after reviewing the situation at some length as a result of which he directed that the lands should be released from the attachment made in the Section 145 proceedings and decided to replace those proceedings with others under the Bengal Alluvial Lands Act, 1920 (Bengal Act V of 1920). The way he puts it is this: 'The land is released from attachment under Section 145, Criminal Procedure ...
Tag this Judgment!Jolekha Bibi and anr. Vs. Danis Mahommad and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-29-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Cal65,122Ind.Cas.630
Rankin, C.J.1. In this case, the plaintiff brought his suit before the third Munsiff at Comilla for possession of certain land exceeding 3 karris in area. He valued the land at Rs. 100. When, the matter came before the officer of the Munsif's Court dealing with the reception of plaints, that officer compared the valuation with the valuation appearing, on a certain chart of land values with, which apparently the Munsif's office hack been provided as a guide to the question whether plaints were being properly valued or not. This document is referred' to as the suits valuation chart. It is not a document which is in anyway evidence but it would appear to be a document with which the officers of the Courts in Tipperah are provided by way of administrative assistance in the discharge of their duties. The Munsif on the matter being drawn to his attention found that the valuation of Rs. 100 was low but, on the ground that the land was said to be an accretion to the river Goomti and to be subm...
Tag this Judgment!Kedar Nath Mistri and anr. Vs. Narayan Chandra Safui
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-29-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Cal344
1. This appeal is by the defendants in a suit for contribution.2. The facts are that the plaintiff and his brother Jadu Safui held a jama of Rs. 32 under the landlords. Jadu sold his 8-annas share to the defendants who could not get their names registered in the landlord's sherishta as the tenancy was a non-transferable occupancy holding. Subsequently the landlords sued the plaintiff and his brother Jadu for arrears of rent. Jadu did not appear but the landlords' claim in the suit was settled between them and the plaintiff at Rs. 162 out of which the plaintiff paid Rs. 81 and for the balance payable by the defendants there was a decree in terms of the solehnama. The amount not having been paid, the decree was executed by the landlords and the holding in suit was sold. The plaintiff thereupon deposited the necessary amount under Order 91, Rule 89, Civil P.C., and saved the tenancy. Thereafter he brought the present suit for contribution against the defendants claiming the amount due fro...
Tag this Judgment!Panchananda Debnath Vs. Brojendra Kumar Sutradhar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-29-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Cal356
Rankin, C.J.1. In this case, the appeal is brought from the judgment and decree of my learned brother Mitter, J., sitting in second appeal. It appears that the present appellant who was the defendant in the suit had certain carpenter's work done for him by the plaintiffs and also lent to the plaintiffs certain sums of money represented by three or four bonds. The appellant sued upon one of the bonds and, on 24th June 1926, got an ex parte decree thereon. The plaintiffs' case is that, by an anterior agreement, it was arranged between the parties that the plaintiffs at certain times would pay certain sums of money and that, though the decree was to be allowed to go ex parte, it would not be executed, provided the plaintiffs kept to their bargain and paid by the instalments agreed upon. The plaintiffs did keep to their bargain as regards the instalments, though the time for paying off all the instalments had not arrived when, on 14th July 1926, the present appellant applied for execution ...
Tag this Judgment!Nafar Chandra Pal Choudhury and anr. Vs. Jatindra Nath Das and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-29-1929
Reported in: AIR1929Cal614,118Ind.Cas.881
Mukerji, J.1. This appeal has arisen out of a suit for rent. The plaintiffs landlords are the appellants in the appeal. In order to appreciate the contentions that have been urged in the case, it is necessary to set out the pleadings somewhat in detail.2. The plaintiffs instituted the suit for recovery of rent on the allegation that they were 12 annas 16 gandas cosharer landlords and that the defendants were holding certain lands under them in utbandi system. In the plaint, certain rates were mentioned as being the rates of rent payable by utbandi tenants in respect of different kinds of land and a decree for rent was prayed for on the footing that separate collections used to be made on behalf of the plaintiffs from those defendants. The main defence of the defendants was to the effect that some of the lands in suit were patit, khicha and a3ha lands, that no rent was payable for patit lands, that the rate for the khicha lands was 8 annas per bigha and that the rate for the asha lands ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »