Kolkata Court August 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.
Jatindra Mohan Ghose Vs. Rebati Mohan Das and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-31-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Cal275
Mukerji, J.1. These two appeals have arisen out of a suit for enforcement of a simple mortgage bond. They are directed against a preliminary decree for sale. The bond was executed by one Raj Mohan Guha designating himself as:common manager, Estate No. 411, Taluk Raj Narain. Son, and the tenures Sikmi Patni etc., thereunder,on 5th Magh 1322 (19th January 1916) for a principal amount of Rs. 30,000 with a stipulation to repay the amount of principal and interest with annual rests in two instalments; one in Pous 1325 and the other in Pous 1327. Deducting certain payments the claim amounted to Rs. 41,000 and odd. Defendant 1 in the suit was the present common manager one Jatindra Mohan Ghose. A subsequent mortgagee was defendant 2. Defendants 3 to 138 were the owners of the taluk and the sikmis and patnis thereunder.2. Appeal No. 220 is by the common manager. In this appeal two contentions have been urged: first, that the suit was not maintainable in the absence of a notice on the appellant...
Soudhamini Das Gupta Vs. Satish Chandra Das and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-31-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Cal414
1. The facts of the case to which these two appeals relate are confusing and complicated, and the parties have not chosen to place before us either all the relevant papers or their arguments in a comprehensible form. The substance of the contentions that have been urged however it is not difficult to understand once the facts are appreciated.2. In a mortgage suit for sale in which the mortgagor and certain puisne mortgagees were impleaded as defendants the decree passed by the trial Court was taken on appeal to this Court by the heirs of the mortgagor and was varied by consent. The relevant terms of the decree as varied were the following:1. One of the mortgaged properties. namely No. 1, had been sold at an auction for arrears of rent due to the landlords; and the plaintiff mortgagee had taken possession of it, having deposited the decretal amount under Section 171, Ben. Ten. Act. The plaintiff's gave up possession of that property.2. A receiver was to be appointed in respect of all th...
Jiteswari Dassi Vs. Sudha Krishna Mukherjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-31-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Cal672,139Ind.Cas.186
1. The question which has to be considered in this appeal is whether an execution sale at which a decree-holder who was also the receiver in respect of the property sold, made a purchase of the properties should be set aside. The receiver was appointed under Order 40, Rule 1 of the Code. He took the permission of the Court to bid for and purchase the properties as required by Order 21, Rule 72 of the Code. But it is not disputed that he did not apply for or obtain any leave from the Court, informing the Court that he was a receiver appointed in respect of the property. It may be conceded that the fact that he was a receiver was not unknown to the Court as he appears to have previously made an application in that capacity for an order for sale, and the said order had been made expressly stating that the application which he had made as receiver was granted. It however does not appear that the Court ever felt called upon to consider the question whether although he was a receiver he shou...
MafizuddIn Ahmad Vs. Narayanganj Central Co-operative Sale and Supply ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-31-1931
Reported in: AIR1933Cal267
1. Two persons, Mafizuddin Ahmed and Jowadali Khondar, executed a security bond in favour of the Narayangunj Central Co-operative Sale and Supply Society Ltd. in connexion with their appointment as brokers for supplying jute to the society. They having incurred certain liabilities in connexion with their work as such brokers, the society referred the dispute to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies of the Dacca Division who appointed an arbitrator in accordance with the provisions of Rule 22 framed under Section 43, Co-operative Societies Act (2 of 1922). The arbitrator made an award in the shape of a preliminary decree and thereafter in the form of a final decree for sale of the secured property. The award being put into execution objections were entered by judgment-debtor 1, Mafizuddin Ahmad. These objections were overruled and on that he has appealed. Two grounds have been taken in the appeal.2. The first ground is that the reference under Rule 22, Sub-rule (1) was ultra vires ina...
Mrs. O.K. Smith Vs. Mr. H.P. Smith
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-28-1931
Reported in: AIR1933Cal12
Costello, J.1. In this case the petitioner Olive Kathleen Smith prays for the dissolution of her marriage on the ground of the cruelty and adultery of her husband, Henry Percival Smith. The parties were married on 15th May 1918, at the Church of the Sacred Heart, Calcutta, and at that time the petitioner was a girl of about 18 years of age and the respondent was 23 years or thereabouts. The parties are of British Indian domicile and they both profess the Christian religion and accordingly this suit is brought under the Divorce Act of 1869. The petitioner makes a general allegation of cruelty against her husband, but in particular relies upon three specific instances which are set forth in para. 10 of the petition. In that paragraph the petitioner states that some time in August 1920, at No. 21, Sooterkins Lane, the respondent struck her at a time when she was pregnant and threw her on the bed thereby causing injuries to her mouth. Secondly, towards the end of the year 1926, the respond...
iswar Lakshmi Janardan Jiu Vs. Khitish Chandra Singha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-27-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Cal419,137Ind.Cas.864
1. This is an appeal from a decision of the Officiating Subordinate Judge, Second Court, Hooghly, dated 25th February 1929, by which he dismissed the plaintiffs' suit in which they prayed for a declaration that certain properties referred to in the plaint were the absolute debutter properties of the deity Sree Sree Iswar Lakshmi Janardan Jiu and that, as such, they could not be attached and put up to sale in execution of personal decree obtained against defendants 3 and 5.2. The suit was instituted on 21st December 1923. The issues arising on the pleadings were settled on 4th June 1925, The case came on for hearing before the learned Judge on 21st February 1929. Some portions of the order sheet have been placed before us; but it is much to be regretted that it should have taken nearly six years to dispose of this suit in the trial Court.3. It appears that Sree Sree Iswar Lakshmi Janardan Jiu is the family deity of a large number of persons who constituted a joint family named the Nandi...
In Re: Andrew, Yule and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-27-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Cal879,140Ind.Cas.877
Ameer Ali, J.1. This is a special case stated for the opinion of the Court by the arbitrators appointed by the Bengal Chamber of Commerce.2. The dispute relates to 3,00,000 yards of Hessian, contained in 150 bales, sold by the Fort Gloster Jute ., by a contract, dated 6th November 1929. The goods were sold F.A.S. They were resold by the buyers to sub-buyers in America, who purported to reject a portion of the goods, namely, 100 bales out of the 150 bales. The trouble arose owing to the goods, or a considerable portion of them, having gone through a particular batching process which gave them an unusual smell. This smell rendered them unfit for one of the principal purposes for which goods of this class are used, i.e., the packing of provisions.3. The facts have been stated in a special case, which has been drawn with skill and care. As is 'inevitable however certain points of fact are left uncovered by the arbitrators, by which I mean that it has been left to the Court not only to lay ...
Nityagopal Sen Poddar and ors. Vs. Secy. of State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-1931
Reported in: AIR1933Cal25
1. These two appeals have arisen out of an award made by the Land Acquisition Judge of Bakarganj. The land was acquired for a project known as 'Additional land for the new Reserve Police line at Barisal.' The lands are situate by the side of a road known as the Bagura Alekanda Road and lie within the municipal limits of the town of Barisal. The declaration was dated 13th November 1926. The claimants are the appellants. In The decree of the Court below will be found the different plots their character, the award made in respect of them by the Land Acquisition Collector and the variation, if any, made by the Judge. There were four groups of claimants in respect of the land acquired, of whom only two are the appellants in two appeals. Group No. 1 are the appellants in Appeal No. 441 and Group No. 2 in Appeal No. 424. It will be convenient to deal with the appeals separately.F.A. NO. 424 of 19282. As regards L.A. Plots Nos. 13 and 16, which consist of a building and a tank the Land Acquisi...
Gopal Lal Chandra Vs. Amulyakumar Sur
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-1931
Reported in: AIR1933Cal234
1. The plaintiff instituted this suit for enforcement of a mortgage bond in his favour, of which the consideration was made up of his dues upon seven promissory notes and a cash amount of Rs. 8,000 odd, and upon four subsequent mortgages in his favour on deposit of title deeds. The moneys were taken and the bonds were executed by one Taraknath Banerji, defendant 1 in the suit, who held the mortgaged properties under defendants 3 to 6 under a dar mourasi mokarrari lease. The latter purchased the properties in execution of a decree for arrears of rent against defendant 1. The plaintiff's case was that the said purchase was made with knowledge and notice of the encumbrances in plaintiff's favour and that in law and equity the purchasers were bound to pay up the plaintiff's dues. He prayed for a preliminary decree for sale with liberty reserved to apply for a personal decree for the balance.2. Defendant 2 disclaimed all interest in the mortgaged properties. He, as well as the other defenda...
Sardarmal Seraogi Vs. Jaharmal Chiranjilal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-25-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Cal425
Mukerji, J.1. On a date fixed for the hearing of a suit which the petitioner had instituted, the petitioner, who was present with his witnesses, intimated to the Court that a pleader whom he had engaged for conducting the suit on his behalf was actually engaged in another Court and prayed for a short adjournment. The Munsif passed over the case and asked the petitioner to engage another pleader. He took the case up again about an hour after, as appears on the order sheet, but the pleader had not yet arrived. The petitioner had in the meantime sent his son to call his pleader who was in another Court. It does not appear what the distance between the two Courts was. The Munsif refused to wait any further, and called upon the petitioner to proceed with the case. The petitioner informed the Court that he had sent his son to call the pleader whom he had already engaged, and said that it was not possible for him to engage another pleader and that he was unable to examine himself or his witne...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »