Kolkata Court April 1930 Judgments
Mt. Kuti Baru Bibi Vs. Jitendra Nath Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-29-1930
Reported in: AIR1931Cal425
Costello, J.1. This is an application under Section 115, Civil P.C., to sot aside the judgment of the Subordinate Judge of Jessore dated 31st. August 1929 whereby he reversed the decision of the Munsif of Narail. An application had been made to that Munsif by the present petitioner and another person to set aside an auction sale on the ground that the decree-holder bad colluded with the judgment-debtor and suppressed the sale proclamation and also that the property had been purchased by the judgment-debtor in the benami of one Nishikanto Chakravarti who is one of the opposite parties in this matter. The petitioners based their case upon the fact that there was a subordinate tenancy in respect of a portion of the land which had been sold. It appears however from the actual text of their application that their case was that they ware occupancy raiyats and therefore it would seam that in any event, no matter who the purchaser of the property might be, their interest would be protected by ...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Court-fee Act and
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-28-1930
Reported in: AIR1930Cal686
Rankin, C.J.1. In Suit No. 135 of 1926 certain mortgagees sued to enforce by sale a mortgage granted by the present plaintiff-appellant for Rs. 40,000 and interest over property which the plaintiff now values at Rs. 1,20,000. A puisne mortgagee was impleaded as defendant. In the end, the property was sold to respondent 1 on the present appeal for Rs. 58,500. The amount due upon the first mortgage is not stated but the Registrar of this Court has been informed that it amounted to some Rs. 60,000. The sale was confirmed and a sale-certificate issued. On the auction purchaser seeking an order for possession there under the plaintiff objected and his objection was dismissed.2. Alleging that an extension of time to deposit the balance of the purchase money was fraudulently obtained from the execution Court by the auction purchaser and that the auction purchaser was merely a benamidar for the puisne mortgagee defendant the plaintiff brought the present suit asking for a declaration that he s...
Tag this Judgment!Prem Lall SeIn Vs. Radha Bullav Kankra
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-28-1930
Reported in: AIR1931Cal140
Williams, J.1. The point which I have to decide in this case is, whether a promissory note payable on demand, in which there is no mention of interest, cornea within the provisions of S. 80, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and if so, from what date is interest payable where no place is specified for' payment, and no demand was made prior to suit.2. Sections 79 and 80 are as follows:3. Section 79:---When interest at a specified rate is expressly made payable on a promissory note, interest shall be calculated at the rate specified, on the amount of the principal money due thereon, from the date of the instrument, until tender or realization of such amount or until such date after the institution of a suit to recover such amount as the Court directs.Section 80:--When no rate of interest is specified in the instrument, interest on the amount due thereon shall, (notwithstanding any agreement relating to interest between any parties to the instrument) be calculated at the rate of 6 per cen...
Tag this Judgment!Rahim Bux Sarkar Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-1930
Reported in: AIR1930Cal717,129Ind.Cas.359
Costello, J.1. In this case the appellant Rahim Bux Sarkar was charged under Section 408, I.P.C., for having committed criminal breach of trust as a servant and he was sentenced to four years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000 in default of payment of which he was to undergo a further term of one year's imprisonment. The main point urged before us is that the form of the charge is bad in law as being contrary to the provisions of Section 234, Criminal P.C. The facts are that the accused had been employed as a supervisor under the Pabna Central Bank to which there were affiliated various rural co-operative societies in police stations Pabna and Sujanagar and the charge against him is that between November 1925 and October 1926 he at various places within the jurisdiction of the police stations at Pabna and Sujanagar, being a servant in the employment of the Pabna Central Co-operative Bank, Ltd. and being entrusted as such servant with the duty of realising for and cred...
Tag this Judgment!Kedar Nath Poddar Vs. Gaya Nath Poddar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-1930
Reported in: AIR1930Cal731,129Ind.Cas.846
Graham, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff from a decision of the Subordi nate Judge, 2nd Court, Pabna, affirming a decision of the Munsif, Second Court, Pabna and arises out of a suit for a declaration of title to and recovery of possession of certain lands described in the plaint.2. The plaintiff's case was that Mohim Chandra Poddar, who owned the properties in dispute, died on the 7th Falgoon 1325 B.S. corresponding to the 19th February 1919 leaving as his heirs defendants 2 and 3 who are his daughter's sons. Plaintiff 1 purchased the properties from them on the 18th of Pous 1327 corresponding to 2nd January 1921 in the name of his son plaintiff 2 since deceased and possessed the suit properties until Falgoon 1327 when according to the plaintiff, defendant 1 dispossessed him therefrom. The plaintiff further alleged that after the purchase of the properties from defendants 2 and 3, defendant 1 propounded a will which was said to have been executed by the aforesaid Mohim Chandra ...
Tag this Judgment!Ashgar Ali and ors. Vs. Secy. of State and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-11-1930
Reported in: AIR1930Cal764,129Ind.Cas.416
Graham, J.1. These twenty-two, appeals, in which the plaintiffs are the appellants, are from decisions of the First Additional Subordinate Judge off Noakhali reversing decisions of the Munsif of Hatiya, and arise out of as many suits brought by the plaintiffs-appellants, who are khas mehal tenants, claiming title to certain lands as re-formations and accretions to the lands of their respective jotes held under Government in Chur Jagabandhu a Government Khas Mehal bearing Touzi No. 1943 of the Noakhali Collectorate. The lands, in dispute are on the west side of the admitted jote holdings of the plaintiffs under defendant 1, the Secretary of State for India, and the plaintiffs claimed them as appertaining to their settled jotes under defendant 1 by right of accretion, or by right of re-formation in situ.2. The suits were contested by defendant-1 and by some of the defendants with whom the disputed lands have been settled by defendant 1, in breach, as the plaintiffs alleged, of the right ...
Tag this Judgment!Raja Reshee Case Law Vs. Satish Chandra Pal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-11-1930
Reported in: AIR1931Cal397
Mitter, J.1. These two appeals by the plaintiff landlord arise out of two suits for rent in respect of two mokarari tenures held by the defendant-respondent under the plaintiff. Second Appeal No. 114, relates to Suit No. 24, and No. 115 relates to Suit No. 27. The appeals will have to be dealt with separately as the facts of the two cases are different.2. I will take Appeal No. 114 first. In this case the tenure was created by a pattah of the year 1867, under the predecessor of the plaintiff by which the defendant's predecessor held 2877, bighas and paid a rent of Rs. 359-10-0. In the finally published Record of Rights 2877 bighas were shown within the tenancy of the defendant, but the contiguous lands were shown in possession of the plaintiff as his khas lands. The defendant brought Title Suit No. 360 of 1923 with respect to 105 plots which were recorded as plaintiffs khas land in the settlement record. Defendant obtained a decree for recovery of possession of lands which were include...
Tag this Judgment!Fulmani Dasi Vs. Priya Nath Sen and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-09-1930
Reported in: AIR1930Cal583
Rankin, C.J.1. In my opinion, this appeal must succeed. The suit is by a son against his mother and certain brothers and it appears that the father by his Will made certain properties subject to trust for the benefit of a family Thakur. The Will recites that there is an idol Shiva installed at Benares and that the testator desires certain pujas to be continued to be performed for ever without interruption and, to that reason he creates a trust of the property in Schedule (ka) for the performance of all those pujas, and appoints his wife as the sole trustee for the term of her life for the purpose of carrying out the said debsheba and for performing the puja. It is provided that the wife will take possession of the property and, on receiving the profits, will perform the puja and. carry out the sheba as mentioned in the schedule as trustee for the term of her life. It is further provided that, on her death, the sons and their descendants are to become trustees and to have certain palas ...
Tag this Judgment!Kumar Prativa Nath Roy and ors. Vs. Bonomali Sarkar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-09-1930
Reported in: AIR1931Cal565
1. These thirty appeals by the landlord, arise out of proceedings under Section 105 of the old Ben. Ten. Act. Six of these appeals Nos. 511, 513, 514, 516, 517 and 521 relate to occupancy holdings and the remaining 24 relate to tenures. In the cases relating to occupancy holdings it is argued generally that the Courts below were wrong in dismissing the plaintiff's applications for settlement of fair and equitable rent on the ground of rise in the price of staple food crops under Section 30, Ben. Ten. Act, in the view that the tenancies of the tenant in these cases did not constitute entire holdings within the meaning of Section 30. In Second Appeals Nos. 511, 514 and 516 the Revenue Officer had allowed additional rent for additional area. There were no appeals to the lower appellate Court from those decrees but yet the District Judge in his judgment referred to these cases. As additional rent for additional area was allowed in those cases only on the ground that in the kabuliyats execu...
Tag this Judgment!MohiuddIn and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-08-1930
Reported in: AIR1930Cal437,129Ind.Cas.834
C.C. Ghose, J. 1. In appeal 2 of 1930 the appellant is one Mohiuddin Ahmed and in appeal 3 of 1930 the appellant is one Hemayetuddin Mukhtear. They have been found guilty by the jury in the proportion of 3 to 2 in manner following: the accused Mohiuddin and the accused Hemayetuddin have both been found guilty under Section 120-B read with Section 366, I.P.C., the accused Mohiuddin guilty under Sections 366 and 376, I.P.C. and the accused Hemayetuddin guilty under Section 366/114 I.P.C. The learned Sessions Judge, agreeing with the verdict of the jury, has convicted both the accused under the sections referred to above and he has sentenced them as follows the accused Mohiuddin to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years on each of the three charges, namely under Sections 366 and 376 (two counts) and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of 18 months under Sections 120-B/366, I.P.C. the sentences to run concurrently: the accused Hemayetuddin to rigorous imprisonment ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »