Kolkata Court June 1930 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.
J.C. Mukerjea Vs. Karnani Industrial Bank Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-20-1930
Reported in: AIR1930Cal770
Rankin, C.J.1. This is an appeal from the decision of my learned brother Lort-Williams, J., who has made absolute a Rule issued under Section 45, Specific Relief Act. The Rule is in the nature of a mandamus to hear and determine' certain matters according to law, and is directed against Mr. J.C. Mukerjea who holds the office of the Chief Executive' Officer of the Calcutta Corporation.2. It appears that the applicant bank are the proprietors of certain premises-in Park Street. Those premises included at one time certain shops and certain buildings called Palais-de-Danse Park Hotel, and other hereditaments. The premises were assessed at a certain figure under the machinery provided by Clause (1), Section 131, Calcutta Municipal Act of 1923. That clause provides for a sexennial assessment of all the properties in Calcutta. On 5th January 1928, owing to the demolition of certain parts of the property, the valuation was reduced from Rs. 30,618 to the figure of 23,531, and on 23rd June 1928 ...
Narayandas Burman and ors. Vs. Shiromoni Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-20-1930
Reported in: AIR1931Cal281
Rankin, C.J.1. In my opinion, this appeal must be allowed and the suit must be dismissed with costs on the original side and before us.2. The suit was brought in 1924 and it was brought against three persons or sets of persons of whom we are now concerned only with the first. The defendants with whom we are concerned and who are the appellants before us are the legal representatives of one Damodardas. It appears that Damodardas acted for a time as trustee of a certain foundation belonging to the Sikh community to which belonged certain endowments and shrines situated in Calcutta. This foundation has been generally referred to by the name of Burra Sikh Sangat which etymologically implies that it is an association; but there can be no doubt that it is a religious foundation, that the property of the foundation is held by trustees and that from time to time the Court has purported to appoint trustees to the foundation. Whether or not there is a right in the members to appoint a trustee at...
Baidyanath SeIn Vs. Rajendranath SeIn and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-19-1930
Reported in: AIR1930Cal803
Rankin, C.J.1. In my opinion this appeal must be allowed. It appears that the testator died on 14th December 1928. He left a will dated 11tb, October 1928 appointing his son the present appellant to be the executor to his estate. Various people entered caveats and on 16th January 1929 before the testator had been dead more than a month, certain of his grandsons started a suit for partition of the estate left by him on the basis that the grandfather had died intestate. On that footing, and at that time, the Official Receiver was appointed the receiver. The main charges at that time> against the present appellant were that he was collecting the moveables, that he was insisting upon collecting papers and doing the very things which he was bound and entitled to do if, in fact, he was the executor. Still caveats were entered by the grandsons and, on 24th January 1929, in this partition suit, on the basis of intestacy, a receiver was appointed. The matters went on and on 21st November 1929, ...
Aditya Kumar Bhattachrjee Vs. Abinash Chandra Mukhopadhya and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-19-1930
Reported in: AIR1931Cal323
Suhrawardy, J.1. This is an appeal by defendant 1 in a suit for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from filling up an ejmali tank in which the plaintiff has 6 annas, 4gds. share and defendant 1 has 9 annas 10 gds. share. The defence was that there was a partition of the tank (which the defendant called a ditch) and the defendant was in possession of his shares of it. The trial Court finding that there was partition between the parties dismissed the suit.2. On appeal the learned District Judge disagreed with the trial Court on the finding of fact and held that the plaintiff was entitled to have a decree as prayed for and gave certain directions for the carrying out of the decree including the direction that the defendant should either remove the earth put by him in the tank or pay Rs. 100 to the plaintiff towards the cost of cleaning the tank and removal of the earth if the plaintiff should find it necessary to do so.3. This judgment was passed on 23rd April 1928. The dec...
Baidyanath SeIn Vs. Rajendra Nath SeIn and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-19-1930
Reported in: 129Ind.Cas.879
George Claus Rankin, C.J.1. In my opinion, this appeal must be allowed. It appears that the testator died on the 14th December, 1928. He left a Will dated the 11th October, 1928, appointing his eon the present appellant to be the executor to his estate' Various people entered caveats and, on the 16th January, 1929, before the testator had been dead more than a month, certain of his grandsons started a suit for partition of the estate left by him on the basis that the grand-father had died intestate. On that footing and at that time the Official Receiver was appointed the Receiver. The main charges at that time against the present appellant were that he was collecting the moveables, that he was insisting upon collecting papers and doing the very things which he was bound and entitled to do if, in fact, he was the executor. Still caveats were entered by the grandsons and on the 24th January, 1929, in this partition suit, on the basis of intestacy, a Receiver was appointed. The matters we...
Abdul Sobhan Khan Vs. SamasuddIn Ahmed and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-17-1930
Reported in: AIR1931Cal336
Patterson, J.1. The order complained of purports to be one under Order 23, Rule 1, Civil P. C, and was passed by the learned Additional Subordinate Judge of Mymensingh in an appeal from a judgment of the Munsif of Bajitpur. The order is couched in the following terms:At the heaving oil this appeal, the plaintiff has prayed for withdrawal of his claim in respect of plot 3 of the suit land with permission to bring a fresh suit. The other party objected to the grant of fresh permission, but if is clear from the pleadings that as there are other formal defects in the ease the plaintiff is entitled to withdrawal of his claim in respect of plot 3 with permission to bring a fresh suit. Accordingly, I allow the plaintiff to withdraw his claim in respect of plot 3 with permission to bring a fresh suit, if not otherwise barred in law.2. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that this order is without jurisdiction, inasmuch as it contains no indication of the formal defects referred to ther...
Barisal Rindan Samiti Vs. Sital Chandra Mukhopadhya and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-16-1930
Reported in: AIR1930Cal630,129Ind.Cas.407
Rankin, C.J.1. In this case the learned Munsif of the Central Court of Barisal has through the District Judge made a reference to this Court under Section 60, Stamp Act, 1899.2. The plaintiff company instituted two suits on two promissory notes as they are called payable on demand for amounts below Rs. 250 in each case and each of the documents sued upon was stamped with a stump of one anna. The documents contain a stipulation in each case to pay interest at the rate of Re. 1-8-0 per cent per mensem and, at the end of the Bengali year, according to the rules of compound interest, that is to say, to pay interest at Re. 1-8-0 per cent per mensem with yearly rests. The view taken by the learned Munsif was that the provisions of Section 23, Stamp Act, did not apply to compound interest. The provisions of Section 23 are that, where interest is expressly made payable by the terms of an instrument, such instrument shall not be chargeable with duty higher than that with which it would have bee...
Sadafal Kanu Vs. Sodari Hajam
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-16-1930
Reported in: AIR1931Cal496
1. This appeal has been preferred by an objector to an application for probate who was unsuccessful in the Court below. The probate applied for was in respect of a will said to have been executed by one Polak Mistri Lohar on 11th October 1927. The will is a simple one in which it is stated that one Godari Hajam, the applicant for probate who was a son born of the womb of the testator's mistress is appointed executor. By the will the testator provided that after his death the said Godari Hajam would be entitled to take probate without any security and would pay off his debts by selling some portions of the immovable properties left by him and would carry out his other directions. The will provided that the testator's mistress Nanki Hajam would enjoy during her lifetime all the moveable and immovable properties that would be left after payment of the testator's debts. It further provided that on Nanki's death Godari, and if he was not alive, his sons would take the properties absolutely....
Ashutosh Basu Vs. Sudhangshubhushan Mukherji
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-16-1930
Reported in: AIR1931Cal688
Remfry, J.1. In this matter Sudhangshubhushan Mukherji, one of the mortgagors, applies for liberty to pay to the Registrar Rs. 1,365-0-0, being 5 per cent of the purchase money in respect of a sale held by the registrar of this Court under a mortgage decree on 11th April 2930. and that thereupon the sale be set aside.2. It appears that the mortgagees have been paid and that a sum equivalent to 5 per cent of the purchase money was paid in on the last possible day. There wore three purchasers of four lots sold.3. The only question for decision is whether these purchasers are entitled to anything over and above 5 per cent in their purchase money and of course the return of their deposits. The firm of Chandanmull Indrakumar, purchasers of lots 3 and 4 for Rs. 3,050 and Rs. 2,000, respectively claim in addition to the 5 per cent Rs. 604-13-0 as costs alleged to have been incurred in investigating the title and preparing for the completion of the sale before notice that the mortgagor was app...
Sadafal Kanu Vs. Gadari Hajam
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-16-1930
Reported in: 131Ind.Cas.856a
1. This appeal has been preferred by an objector to an application for Probate who was unsuccessful in the Court below. The Probate applied for was in respect of a Will said to have been executed by one Polak Mistri Lohar on the 11th October, 1927. The Will is a simple one in which it is stated that one Godari Hajam, the applicant for Probate who was a son born of the womb of the testator's mistress is appointed executor. By the Will the testator provided that after his death the said Godari Hajam would be entitled to take Probate without any security and would pay off his debts by selling some portions of the immoveable properties left by him and would carry out his other directions. The Will provided that the testator's mistress Nanki Hajam would enjoy during her life-time all the moveable and immoveable properties that would be left after payment of the testator's debts. It further pro-vided that on Nanki's death Godari, and if he was not alive his sons would take the properties abs...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »