Kolkata Court May 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.
Juman Sadagar Vs. Corporation of Calcutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-22-1929
Reported in: AIR1929Cal490
Mukerji, J.1. This Rule has been is-issued to show cause why the conviction of the petitioner under Section 488 read with Section 271, Calcutta Municipal Act, (Act 2 B.C. of 1923) should not be set aside or such other or further order made as to this Court may seem fit and proper. The facts necessary to be stated are the following. The petitioner holds a certain property, to wit, premises No. 7 Gas Street, Calcutta, on a lease. The premises in question were in the occupation of a tenant Kissen Ram Shaw who, it is said, held the same under a registered kabuliat for two years from 8th December 1920 and on the expiry of the term has been holding over. In October 1927 the Corporation of Calcutta served a notice on the petitioner under Section 271, Calcutta Municial Act, requiring him to erect two connected privies in the premises. The petitioner, having failed to comply with this requisition, was convicted at first on 3rd April 1928, and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 25 and again on 12th ...
Phani Bhusan Dhar Vs. Anukul Mukherjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-22-1929
Reported in: AIR1929Cal590
B.B. Ghose, J.1. This is an appeal by an applicant. The application was made under Section 144, Civil P.C.A suit was brought by respondent 1 against the appellant for ejectment. The suit was decreed and the appellant was dispossessed in execution of that decree on 6th September 1926. That decree was reversed finally on 26th March 1927. In the meantime, respondent 1 granted a lease of the property to respondents 2 and 3. The appellant made the application against all the respondents. The learned Munsiff allowed the petition as against respondent 1 and he directed that the petitioner would get possession as against him, but he dismissed the petition against respondents 2 and 3. The result of it might have been that the appellant Phani Bhusan would not get possession of the property of which he was deprived in execution of a decree which had been reversed. Thereupon Phani Bhusan appealed to the learned District Judge. The learned District Judge has very rightly decided that Phani Bhusan i...
Ramjoy Modak and ors. Vs. Durga Charan Nath and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-22-1929
Reported in: AIR1929Cal830
Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs and arises out of a suit brought by them on the allegation that the lands were originally held by one Dina Nath at a jama of Rs. 8-3-0 and that Dina Nath made a gift of the entire holding on 5th March 1327 B. S. to defendant 1 and that defendant 1 took possession of the jote on 13th November 1923 and that consequently there has been an abandonment by the old tenant of this holding which entitles the plaintiffs to re-enter, The defence of defendant 1 in substance was that the entire jote of Dina Nath was not transferred to him by the deed of gift and there has not been an abandonment of the jote by the heirs of the old tenant, Dina Nath having died since the execution of the deed of gift. The Court of first instance found that there has been a gift of the entire holding of Dina Nath and basing its decisi6n on this finding decreed the plaintiffs' suit and declared the plaintiffs' maliki right to the lands in suit and directed that they do ...
Kiron Chandra Ghose and ors. Vs. Hamid Khan and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-21-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Cal300
B.B. Ghose, J.1. This is an appeal by the decree-holders who obtained a decree purported to have been made under Section 155, Ben. Ten. Act against defendants 1 and 2. The decree was to the effect that the defendants should pay to the decree-holder plaintiff Rs. 60 within a certain period and remove the structures on schedule 'kha' of the plaint within that period. On their failure to do so, they would be liable to ejectment under the provisions of Section 155, Ben. Ten. Act. The decree-holders thereupon applied for execution of the decree in these terms that they asked for compensation awarded by the Court as well as for ejectment. One of the judgment-debtors deposited the amount of compensation into Court, The structures on the land of schedule kha 'had' not been removed. The trial Court held that the decree-holder was entitled to execute the decree after rejecting the objections raised on behalf of -one of the judgment-debtors. That judgment-debtor preferred an appeal against the or...
Durga Prosad Das Vs. Kedarnath Nayek and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-21-1929
Reported in: AIR1929Cal650
B.B. Ghose, J.1. This is an appeal by the legal representative of judgment-debtor 4 against the order of the District Judge of Midnapur affirming the decision of the Subordinate Judge allowing the execution of the decree in favour of the respondents. A final decree on a mortgage was made on 8th May 1924. The original judgment-debtor 4 died on 18th August 1924. An application for execution was made on 7th May 1927 against all the judgment-debtors and in which the name of the deceased judgment-debtor 4 was also mentioned. On 28th July 1927 by an ex parte application made by the decree-holder the present appellant was substituted in the place of the deceased 'judgment-debtor 4. Previous to that, the decree-holder made an application for amendment of the decree of 17th December 1926. A further application was made on 10th May 1927 for certain other amendments of the decree. An order was made by the Court on 6th June 1927 amending the decree in certain particulars. That Court, however, refu...
Sheo Proshad Halani Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-21-1929
Reported in: 123Ind.Cas.744
Mukerji, J.1. The petitioner has been convicted under Section 7 of the Bengal Food Adulteration Act VI of 1919. He has obtained this Rule upon grounds Nos. 2, 5 and 6 of the petition.Ground No 2.--'For that the leave in writing from the local authorities under Section 15 of the Act not having been proved in the case, the proceedings were without jurisdiction.' The Magistrate says in his explanation that there was a sanction granted by the Chairman of the District Board which, through oversight, was not filed and as the prosecution has now filed it he has sent it up to this Court. When cognizance was taken by the Court of the offence it was expressly stated by the complainant that there was such a sanction.Ground No. 5.--'For that the learned Magistrate has acted with material irregularity in acting upon the report of the Director of Public Health without the same being proved as the identity of the article found during investigation being established.' From the Magistrate's explanation...
Madan Mohan Saha Banik and ors. Vs. Rakhal Chandra Saha Banik and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-17-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Cal173
B.B. Ghose, J.1. This is an appeal by, the principal defendants arising out of a suit for partition and accounts decreed by the learned Subordinate Judge, First Court, of Dacca. The plaintiffs asked for partition of the immovable properties consisting of three houses described in items 1, 2 and 3, Schedule Ka in the plaint and for accounts against the defendants of the five karbars described in Schedule Ga of the plaint and also for an account with regard to some gold and silver articles mentioned in Schedule Kha of the plaint. The learned Subordinate Judge has made a decree in favour of the plaintiffs with regard to the entire claim except with regard to karbar No. 4 described in Schedule Ga.2. The plaintiffs' right to partition arose on these facts : There were four brothers Krishna Charan, Tokani, Rashiklal and Boharilal who formed a joint Hindu family. Krishna Charan died long ago leaving him surviving his widow Anandamayee and two daughters. Anandamayee died, according to the find...
Kanti Chandra Tarafdar and ors. Vs. Radha Raman Sarkar and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-17-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Cal461
Rankin, C.J.1. This is an appeal by defendants 1 and 2 from a preliminary decree for accounts passed by the learned Subordinate Judge of Burdwan in a suit brought by the plaintiff Radha Raman Sarkar against the persons who were appointed executors of the will of one Rajabala Dasi. These persons were appointed executors by her will dated 6th December 1909 which appears to have been about the time when she died and the grant to them was limited to the minority of the plaintiff. The date of the grant to them of the probate was 8th May 1911. The learned Judge has found and it appears to be clear that the plaintiff came of age in September 1918 and he has decreed accounts for 1911 to 1919 against defendants 1 and 2 only. He has also given certain directions with regard to the taking of these accounts.2. The first question that was raised in this appeal when it was opened was the question whether or not the learned Judge was correct in making an order for accounts for the period of 1911 onwa...
Dhanoo and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-15-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Cal294
ORDERMukerji, J.1. The defect that is noticeable in the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge is that he has not dealt with the evidence which would justify the order as against each of the 14 accused persons who were the appellants before him, separately and individually. This, defect would not have been of much materiality if the inquiring Magistrate had done so in passing the order that he did. That officer, it appears, considered it sufficient to find that all the accused belong to a party known as 'Rahimuddin's party' or 'Abani Babu's party' Rahimuddin being the immediate leader, Abani Babu the guiding or controlling authority and the remaining accused persons being Abani Babu's tenants and adherents. Considerations such as these are not sufficient for making an order in a lump against a body of men. Facts and figures have to be given showing how each person, against whom the order is to be made, deserves to be so treated.2. The Rule is made absolute, and the judgment of the lear...
Prince Victor N. Narayan Vs. Kumar Bhoirabendra Narayan Deb and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Cal388
1. This rule was issued at the instance of Prince Victor Narayan, defendant 9, in a suit pending in the Court of Subordinate Judge of 24-Parganas, who has now been declared a bankrupt under the English Bankruptcy Act. The rule is in these terms:Why the order striking out the names of defendant 9 mentioned in the petition should not be set aside and why the trustee in bankruptcy should not be brought on the record in place of defendant 9 referred to in the petition.2. With regard to the second portion of this rule, it may be mentioned that there is no application before us either on behalf of the bankrupt or on behalf of the trustee in bankruptcy that such trustee should be substituted in place of defendant 9 in the suit.3. The main question that has been argued before us is as to the propriety of the order of the learned Judge striking off the petitioner's name from the suit. A short history of this litigation may be useful in considering the nature of the objection. The suit was broug...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »