Kolkata Court June 1931 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.
Sali Sheikh and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-04-1931
Reported in: AIR1931Cal752
Williams, J. 1. The appellants were charged with two others of murder. They were tried by the Additional Sessions Judge at Mymensingh and a jury. By a majority of six to three the jury-returned a verdict of guilty against the appellants and of not guilty against the two other accused. The learned Judge charged the jury in such a way as makes it obvious that his own inclination was in favour of the present appellants. Nevertheless he said in his order that though he would have preferred a verdict of not guilty against all the accused he did not think it proper to disagree-wholly from them and refer the case to the High Court. He went on to say that the learned Public Prosecutor said that as there was some provocation the lesser sentence of transportation might be imposed, though the provocation was, not sufficient to bring the case under Section 304, I. P.C., and this suggestion the learned Judge adopted. I may say at the outset that I can find no evidence whatever of any provocation su...
Haran Chandra Chakravarti and anr. Vs. Kaliprasanna Sarkar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-02-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Cal83a
1. This appeal has bean preferred from an order of remand by which the Subordinate Judge, holding in an appeal that an amalnama, which had been filed by the defendants in the trial Court as evidence on their behalf and on the basis of which they succeeded in that Court, was not admissible, has remanded the suit to that Court for a fresh decision after taking such evidence as the parties may choose to adduce. The facts necessary to be stated are the following.2. The plaintiff sued the defendants for a permanent injunction restraining the latter from erecting a pucca boundary wall on a small plot of land, and also a mandatory injunction calling upon them to demolish a pucca wall which they had already erected. These and other consequential and incidental reliefs were asked for on the basis of a declaration that was also sought to the effect that defendant 1 was a mere tenant-at-will with respect to the said plot of land.3. On behalf of the defendants it was pleaded inter alia that defend...
Sm. Masuda Khatun Bibi Vs. Mahomed Ebrahim
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-02-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Cal93
Mukerji, J.1. This is an appeal by defendant 1 from a preliminary decree in a partition suit. The following genealogy will show the relationship of the parties: 1st wife = Bazlul Karim = 2nd wife S.M. Masuda Khatun died 3rd Falgun 1830 Srimati Latifa Defendant 1. B.S.=18th February 1924. Bibi, dead. | _________________________________________________________________________ | | | 1st wife = Son = 2nd wife Daughter Daughter Mrs. Katherine | Badrul Alum S.M. Abeda Sm. Siddiquo Srimati Badre Alum. Def. 4 | died 1925. Khatun. Bibi Jehan. | Def. 3. (Died 1926) Def. 2. | = Husband Md. | Ibrahim, | Plff. 2. | | | | Daughter Son S.M. Badre Manir Golam Haidar alias Tepi. Plaintiff Defendant 5. No. 1.The two plaintiffs commenced the action on a plaint filed on 28th February 1927. The properties in respect of which partition was asked for were described in three schedules annexed to the plaint; schedule Ka, consisting of securities and cash, schedule Kha, moveable properties and schedule Ga, im...
Jnanadasundari Shaha Vs. Madhabchandra Mala
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-02-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Cal482
Suhrawardy, J.1. This matter arises under the following circumstances: In a mortgage suit, after the preliminary and final decrees, a personal decree was passed against the opposite party on 13th June 1930. On 31st July 1930, an application for amendment was made by him, which was rejected on 28th August 1930. The High Court was unsuccessfully moved against that order on 5th December 1930. Then on 23rd December 1930, an appeal was filed before the District Judge against the personal decree passed on 13th June 1930, on a court-fee of Re. 1 only out of Rs. 135 payable on the memorandum. Time was granted by the District Judge to file the deficit court-foe till 6th January 1931. The deficit court-fee not having been put in, on 7th January 1931, the following order was passed:The deficit court-fee stamp has not been put in. The memorandum of appeal is rejected.2. On 8th January, the opposite party again prayed for seven days' time to file the deficit court-fee stamp, and the prayer was gran...
Keen Robinson and Co., Ltd. Vs. Lily Biscuit Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-02-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Cal541
Buckland, J.1. This is an application made on behalf of the Lily Biscuit Company, under which firm name two persons, called Pratapchandra Set and his brother Binaykrishna Sat, carry on business, for an order that an ex parte decree, made on 18th May 1931, be set aside. The grounds of the application are that there was no proper service of the writ of summons as required by Order 30, R.3,Civil P.C. (His Lordship on considering evidence found that the summons had been served on a partner of the defendant firm.) A further question arises for decision, for it is contended by reference to Order 30, Rule 3, Civil P. C, that directions of the Court should have been obtained, and that no directions having been obtained, which is the fact, the service is not a proper service within the meaning of the section: The rule says:Where persona are sued as partners in the name of their firm, the summons shall be served either (a) upon any one or more of the partners, or (b) at the principal place at wh...
Hem Chandra Bag Vs. Rasik Chandra Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-02-1931
Reported in: 150Ind.Cas.762
Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant and arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff to enforce a mortgage security said to have been executed by the defendant and his mother Anandamoyi. It is said that both mother and the son took a loan of Rs. 500, and executed the mortgage bond in suit some time in the year 1318 B.S. The plaintiff claimed a sum of Rs. 2,224, odd including the principal and interest at the rate of Re. per mensem with yearly rests. Anandarnoyi died leaving the defendant now appellant as her son and heir. The main defence of Anandamoyi which is necessary to Consider for the purpose of the present appeal is that the mortgage cannot, be enforced against her as it is not attested in accordance with the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act as amended by the Act of 1926. the plots covered by the mortgage which belong to Anandamoyi are the first four plots of schedule kha of the plaint. The Subordinate Judge who tried the suit in the first instance gave ef...
Wahid Ali Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-01-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Cal523
1. In this case the prisoner Wahid Ali was charged under Sections 368 and 376, I.P.C., and tried with five others by the Additional Sessions Judge of Sylhet and a jury who by a unanimous verdict convicted him under Section 368, and by a majority of 4 to 1 convicted him under Section 376.2. The story for the prosecution wag that a girl Saharjan Bibi, aged 12, who was living with her brother while her husband was away, had been abducted by the accused with the assistance of others and had boon raped by him. The general facts, as alleged by the prosecution, are not of importance for the purpose of this appeal.3. The case for the defence was inter alia that the girl's brother had been excommunicated for the elopement of his sister several times, that she was a woman of loose character, that after her marriage she ran away several times with other persons and that she had previously run away with Hurmat who had assisted the other accused but was absconding. It was also alleged that she had ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›