Kolkata Court April 1932 Judgments

Narayan Singh Sundar Singh Vs. Attar Singh Moal Singh

Court: Kolkata

Rankin, C.J.1. In this case it appears that three persons presented their own petition in insolvency on 1st August 1930. They did not even file their schedule of affairs till 31st March 1931. On the same day they filed a proposal of composition. That proposal is said to mean a good many things which are not properly stated. In itself it contains no information whatever except that there is a hope that the creditors will be paid five annas in the rupee. From what fund they will be paid there is nothing in it to tell us. There is a statement that certain people are very respectable and are prepared to act as trustees and are also prepared to furnish security to the satisfaction of the Court. The composition is not a scheme at all and ought not to be regarded as a scheme. Further details, however are to be obtained from other documents. It seems from the Official Assignee's report that these insolvents have incurred debt at least to the extent of Rs. 1,50,000. There are certain new credit...

Charles Johns Vs. Emperor

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1932Cal550

Mallik, J.1. This Rule is directed against an order passed by the learned Deputy Magistrate of Darjeeling on 20th August 1931 whereby ha directed issue of summons against the petitioner under Section 182, I. P. C. What happened in the present case was briefly this. The petitioner who is a doctor practising in Darjeeling lodged an information with the local police that during his absence the glass panes of a bath-room of his house had been broken open and on inquiry he 'had ascertained that the carpenter of the firm of Messrs. Madan & Co. had come and broken open the glass pane, and that afterwards he had found that some valuable properties had been missing from his house. The police inquired into the matter and submitted a report saying that the case was a false one. An intimation of this was given to the petitioner who happened to be away at Kurseong at that time. This was on 7th August. On 10th August the petitioner filed a naraji petition before the Deputy Magistrate of Darjeeling. ...

Mabajjan Bibi Vs. Emperor

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1932Cal658

C.C. Ghose, J.1. This is a reference under Section 307, Criminal P. C, in a case where the accused Mabajjan Bibi was tried before the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Rangpur and a jury on a charge under Section 302, I. P. C. The jury by a majority of 7 to 2 has given the accused the benefit of the doubt. The learned Judge disagreeing with the verdict of the majority of the jury has referred this case to this Court for final order.2. In view of the order which we propose to make it will not be necessary to go at length into the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution. But shortly stated the case against the accused is as follows: The accused Mabajjan had been married to one Chika Sheikh about six or seven years and had by him two daughters, one aged about 3 named Mafijan, and the other Durgati Bibi, aged about five or six months. On the day of the occurrence, which was the 17th April 1931, at about Jumma Namaj, time about 2 or 2-30 p. m. it is alleged that the accused killed ...

Raj Kumar Mondal and anr. Vs. Shib Chandra Mondal and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1932Cal857

Panckridge, J.1. This Rule raises an interesting question with regard to the construction of Section 182, Ben. Ten. Act, as amended. There was a cultivator of the name of Sonatan Rai Bashia and he had a holding in a certain village, In the same village he held a homestead otherwise than as part of his holding. He transferred that homestead to the petitioners before me. The landlord of the homestead has applied to the Munsif to enforce the right of preemption which is given to landlords in the case of transfers of occupancy holdings by Section 26-F, Ben. Ten. Act. The opposite parties maintain that by reason of Section 182, where a raiyat or an under-raiyat has both a holding and a homestead in the same village all the incidents of the holding are attached to the homestead.2. The learned advocate who has appeared in support of the Rule argues that, even if this is so, there is nothing on the record to indicate what is the nature of the holding held by the deceased transferee. On the oth...

Golam Rahman Khan and ors. Vs. Emperor

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1933Cal184

Mallik, J.1. This Rule arises out of an application for the transfer of a case or in the alternative for an order on the Magistrate directing production of two police diaries. It appears that the petitioners who were prosecuted under Sections 307, 326 and 120-B, I.P. C, applied to the Magistrate under Section 208, Criminal: P.C, for calling for two police diaries. This was on 18th December 1931 and the learned Magistrate on the petitioner's application passed an order: 'Call for the record.' When on 7th January 1932, the next day for the hearing of the case the diaries were found not to have arrived, the petitioners again put in a petition before the Magistrate by which they renewed their prayer adding that the two. Sub-Inspectors (one of whom was mentioned by name in the petition) who had been in charge of the thanas might be summoned as witnesses to produce the diaries. The learned Magistrate rejected this prayer on the ground that the petitioners had not prayed before for issue of s...

Basanta Kumar Das Vs. Nagendra Nath Pal

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1932Cal719,137Ind.Cas.425

1. This appeal is directed against an order of the District Judge of Backergunj, dated 7th March 1932 by which the petitioner was directed to be put into civil jail for disobeying an order of temporary injunction restraining the petitioner from marrying his daughter on a particular date with a particular person. It appears that one Nagendra Nath Pal who is said to be an agnatic relation of the mother of the girl applied to be appointed a guardian of the person of the minor Srimati Teni Dassi with the object apparently of stopping the marriage: of the said Teni Dassi before her completion of the age of 14 years with one Priya Nath Dutta, son of Bepin Behari Dutta of Kusangal. The marriage, according to the petitioner, was in contravention of the Child Marriage Restraint Act (19 of 1929) and the applicant before the District Judge thought that the marriage was not in the interests of the minor child of the appellant. The learned District Judge founding on an affidavit made by the said Na...

H.V. Low and Co., Ltd. Vs. Pulinbiharilal Singha and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1933Cal154

1. This is an appeal from a preliminary decree for sale. The appellants are Messrs. H.V. Low & Co., Ltd., who were defendants 3 (ka) in the suit. The following are the facts of the case: The plaintiffs are the landlords. Mauza Chalbalpur belongs to them in zamindari right. The surface of the said mauza had been settled long ago with the proprietors of Searsole estate in mukarrari rights. On the assumption that the subsoil was in the khas possession of the plaintiffs, one Kalikumar Misra, on 17th October 1913, executed a kabuliyat, which was duly registered, in their favour, taking what is commonly known as a coal mining lease of the said mauza for a term of 499 years. It was stipulated that royalty at certain rates would have to be paid monthly for the coal taken and, in default of such payment, interest at the rate of 1 per cent per month would be charged; it was agreed that a minimum royalty of 600 would have to be paid for the first year, of Rs. 3,000 in the second and in the third ...