Kolkata Court July 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.
Bikram Ali Pramanik and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Cal139
Cuming, J.1. This is an appeal by two persons Bikram Ali Pramanik and Kudrutulla Khan. These two persons together with one Samatulla were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Pabna and a jury on charges of dacoity and house breaking by night. The jury unanimously found all the three persons guilty under Section 457, I.P.C., and not guilty under Section 395, I.P.C. The appeal of Samatulla has been summarily dismissed and that of the other two appellants is now before us.2. The case for the prosecution briefly was that these persons together with a number of other persons broke into the house of the complainant on the night of 27th May 1928. The defence briefly was a denial of the whole occurrence; and there was a suggestion in the case of Samatulla of enmity.3. The first point raised by the learned vakil for the appellants is that the alternative charges under Sections 395 and 457, I.P.C., are bad in law. Why it is bad in law I am unable to understand. Offence under Section...
Satyendra Nath Khan and ors. Vs. Panchanon Chatterjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Cal455
Page, J.1. In our opinion this is a clear ease. The plaintiff's case is that one Shib Chandra died leaving four sons, one of whom was Kedar and another Ram Nrisingha. Kedar had a daughter Rakhal Dasi who had a son, the plaintiff. Rakhal Dasi is dead, and the plaintiff such to recover his share of the inheritance. He is resisted by defendants 1 to 3 who assert that on the death of Earn his four sons mortgaged the property in suit to the mother of defendants 1 to 3, The finding of both Oourt3 is adverse to the defendants.2. On appeal before us the learned advocate on behalf of the defendants-appellants has taken two points, firstly that the plaintiff has no title inasmuch as he based his title upon a decree of 1909, in a suit brought by Rakhal Dasi against the four sons of Earn, and in that suit two of the sons of Earn were minors and were not represented by a guardian-ad-litem appointed by the Court and therefore the decree was not binding upon them. The second point taken was that that...
(Sreepati) Bhusan Mondal and anr. Vs. Sarbeswar Mondal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Cal474
Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs and it arises out of a suit brought by them for recovery of possession of several plots of land, 19, in number mentioned in the plaint after declaration of their title thereto. The plaintiffs claimed the disputed plots as the reversionary heirs of one Syam Chandra Mondal. There is a genealogical tree attached to the plaint which shows the relationship between Syam Chandra and the present plaintiffs and it has not been questioned before us that the plaintiffs are the reversionary heirs of Syam Chandra. The defendants' case was that plots 1 to 3 and 17 and 19 belonged to Syam Chandra but that their father purchased the same from Syam Chandra on 18th Falgun 1272 B.S. and that since then they had been in possession thereof in their own right. They further said that plots 14, 15 and 16 were their own ancestral property and that Syam Chandra had no interest therein. As regards plot 18, their case was that it was the stridhan property of their ...
Jnanendranarayan Bagchi and ors. Vs. Saradasundari Dasi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1929
Reported in: AIR1931Cal25,129Ind.Cas.355
Rankin, C.J.1. In this case, the plaintiff, as landlord, brought a suit against the defendant in a somewhat curious form. He asked, first of all, for assessment of rent, on the footing that the defendant was his tenant and had not hitherto been assessed with rent, but was liable to be assessed with rent, and then he went on to ask, in the alternative, that if the defendant denied his title then the defendant should be ejected as a trespasser. I will not stop for a moment to discuss whether such an alternative claim as that is properly, framed. If a person makes an alternative case, then, for the purpose of that]; case, he must make all the necessary assertions to carry the reliefs and he must prove them.2. However, looking at this as a case of two alternative branches, the first question is whether the suit could be brought, having regard to Section 109, Ben. Ten. Act,, in view of the fact that a previous application for assessment was made under Section 105, Ben. Ten. Act, and that th...
Sreepati Bhusan Mandal and anr. Vs. Sarbeswar Mandal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1929
Reported in: 128Ind.Cas.201
Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs and it arises out of a suit brought by them for recovery of possession of several plots of land--19 in number mentioned in the plaint after declaration of their title thereto. The plaintiffs claimed the disputed plots as the reversionary heirs of one Shyam Chandra Mandal. There is a genealogical tree attached to the plaint which shows the relationship between the Syam Chandra and the present plaintiffs and it has not been questioned before us that the plaintiffs are the reversionary heirs of Syam Chandra. The defendants' case was that plots Nos. 1 to 13 and 17 and 19 belonged to Syam Chandra but that their father purchased the same from Syam Chandra on the 18th Falgun 1272 B.S. and that since then they had been in possession thereof in their own right. They further said that plots Nos. 14, 15 and 16 were their own ancestral property and that Syam Chandra had no interest therein As regards plot No. 18, their case was that it was the strid...
Monmohini Dassi Vs. Taramoni
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-23-1929
Reported in: AIR1929Cal733
B.B. Ghose, J.1. Appeal No. 3 of 1929 is directed against an order made by the learned District Judge asking for security from the petitioner for probate to the extent of Rs. 10,000. An objection is taken to the competency of the appeal on the ground that it is not a final order. I think that the preliminary objection is substantial and that no appeal lies against that order. It is, accordingly, dismissed.2. Appeal No. 42 is against the final order made by the Judge striking off the application for probate. This amounts to a dismissal of the application. The case was struck off on two grounds that the probate duty was not paid and that the security was not furnished within one month as allowed by the learned Judge. The probate duty, we are told, could not be paid, because the Collector had not finished his work with regard to the valuation of the estate. So long as the Collector did not send his report as regards the valuation of the property, the executor was not in a position to asce...
Haridas Mukherjee Vs. Bijay Krishna Das and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Cal387
Page, J.1. Notwithstanding a skilful and ingenious argument on behalf of the opposite party in our opinion the rule must be made absolute. It appears that on the date fixed a case was called for hearing and an application was made on behalf of the defendant that the suit might be adjourned in order that he might have an opportunity of calling a certain witness. In the circumstances that application was dismissed. Thereafter as there was no appearance on the merits by the defendant the suit was decreed ex parte against him. Thereupon an application was made under Order 9. Rule 13, Civil P.C., for the restoration of the suit. Now, on behalf of the opposite party it is urged that that application was really in two parts (1) with respect to the application for an adjournment in order that the defendant might procure the attendance of the witness and (2) under Order 9, Rule 13, Civil P.C. for an order of restoration upon the footing that the defendant could satisfy the Court that he had suf...
Hridoymohan Sanyal Vs. Khagendra Nath Sanyal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1929
Reported in: AIR1929Cal687
B.B. Ghose, J.1. We have heard learned advocates on both sides at some length and we must express our acknowledgment to them for the very careful way in which this case has been argued before us.2. This is an appeal by the decree-holder or rather the person who has applied for execution of an agreement against the judgment and order of the learned Subordinate Judge affirming the decision of the Munsif by which the application of the appellant was dismissed. The facts are shortly these:3. The appellant obtained a decree for money against the respondents dated 17th December 1913. There were intermediate executions which it is unnecessary to relate now. In one of the execution proceedings the parties came to terms and a compromise was entered into between them dated 16th September 1922, by which the decree-holder gave up a part of his claim and it is alleged in the petition of compromise that the judgment-debtor entreated the decree-holder to accept only Rs. 350 in satisfaction of the dec...
Shailabala Ray Vs. Jnanendranath Ganguli and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-19-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Cal821
Panckridge, J.1. This is a Chamber summons taken out by certain purchasers at a Registrar's sale in a' mortgage suit and adjourned to Court for hearing. The mortgaged premises are No. 22, Nayanchand Datta Street, and they were brought to sale by public auction in pursuance of the final decree passed on 8th April 1927. In the notification of sale the premises are described as follows:All that brick-built, partly one storeyed and partly two storeyed, messuage, tenement or dwelling house together with the piece or parcel of land thereunto belonging, containing by measurement 8 cottas 5 chhittaks 18 sq. ft. more or less, situate, lying at and being premises No. 22, Nayanchand Datta Street, in Sutunati in the northern part of the town of Calcutta.2. Of the conditions of sale the following are material:Condition 2. The sale is subject to a reserved bidding which has been fixed by the Registrar.Condition 12. Where any error or misstatement shall appear to have been made in the particulars or ...
Bhusan Chandra Ghose Vs. George Henderson and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-19-1929
Reported in: AIR1929Cal774
B.B. Ghose, J.1. This is an appeal against an order of the learned Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act dismissing the application made by a workman who had been injured by his arm being torn off by a machine while in the service of the respondent. His ease was that he was cleaning jams by putting his arm into the machine when another, a boy named Panchu who was employed under the respondent, put the machinery in motion and the result was that his hand was torn off above the arm. He asked for compensation of a lump sum of Rs. 882. The learned Commissioner dismissed his claim. Two witnesses were examined on behalf of the appellant before the learned Commissioner and one witness was examined on behalf of the respondent. Two issues were framed by the learned Commissioner. One refers to the fact whether the accident arose out of the employment. There is no question that that issue should be decided in favour of the appellant and the learned Commissioner has apparently done so....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »