Kolkata Court June 1932 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.
Kanti Chandra Tarafdar and anr. Vs. Radharaman Sirkar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-17-1932
Reported in: AIR1934Cal296,150Ind.Cas.36
1. This is an appeal preferred by defendants 1 and 2 from a final decree in a suit which wa3 instituted by the plaintiff against them and some other persons including one Jatindra Nath Bose. The plaintiff is a universal legatee under the will of his grandmother. The will was executed in 1909 and the testatrix died soon after. There were five executors named in the will amongst whom were the two defendants and the aforesaid Jatindra Nath Bose. According to the provisions in the will the plaintiff was to get the estate when he attained majority and the executors were to act as such during his minority. In 1911 all the five executors applied for and obtained probate of the will. Defendant 2 was also appointed guardian of the plaintiff. The plaintiff attained majority on 11th Aswin 1325 (=28th September 1918) and instituted this suit on 7th September 1923.2. The plaintiff prayed inter alia for setting aside certain transfers which defendants 1 and 2 had made on declaration of his title to ...
Surajmull Shroff Vs. Gopeeram Bhotica and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-16-1932
Reported in: AIR1932Cal823
Mukerji, J.1. The plaintiff's claim in the present case which has succeeded in the Court below is based upon a mortgage, the validity of which is disputed by defendant 2, the appellant in this appeal. The acts of the case are the following : Premises No. 11, Cockler's Lane belonged to the Mitras, who sold it to one Tarala Debi for Rs. 65,000 on 23rd March 1920. The plaintiff's case is that in order to make this purchase Tarala Debi borrowed the entire amount from him on the same day upon executing a promissory note and effecting a mortgage by deposit of title-deeds of the said property and of certain other properties as well. He obtained a decree on this mortgage and in execution of that decre9 purchased the said premises and also one of the other properties mortgaged, on 14th February 1924. The sale was confirmed on 18th March 1924 and he took delivery of possession on 17th June 1924. His case is that he could not get actual possession of the disputed land which forms a part of the sa...
Giribala Dasi Vs. Mader Gazi and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-15-1932
Reported in: AIR1932Cal699
Mallik, J.1. This rule was directed against an order made by the Assistant Sessions Judge of Jessore on 23rd November 1931 whereby he granted an application of the Public Prosecutor of that place under Section 494, Criminal P. C., to withdraw from the prosecution of two persons Mader Gazi and Arshad Sardar under Section 366, I. P. C., and acquitted them. What happened in the case was this : at the instance of complainant Giribala Dasi, Mader, Arshed and another man Aftab Mondal by name were summoned by the Magistrate under Section 366, I. P. C., and the Magistrate after examining a number of witnesses discharged Aftab but committed the other two men Mader and Arshad to take their trial in the Court of Session. An unsuccessful attempt was made to have the cass referred to the High Court in order that the commitment might be quashed under Section 215, Criminal P. C. Thereafter after some adjournments on 23rd November 1931 an application of the Public Prosecutor to withdraw from the prose...
Banga Chandra De and ors. Vs. Sm. Menaka Sundari De
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-15-1932
Reported in: AIR1933Cal74
1. The will concerned in this case is alleged to have boon executed by one Ganga Bishnu De on 17th September 1888. He died about a month after, leaving a brother named Ram Gobinda De and a widow, a widowed sister and three infant daughters who were then residing with their mother in the house of Ram Gobinda. On 17th December 1889 Ram Gobinda as executor made a petition for probate giving in the petition the names of the widow and the widowed sister and stating that they were under the will entitled to enjoy the profits of the estate left by Ganga Charan and also saying that his own son Jagatbandhu was the owner of the said property by virtue of the will. Citation was issued on the widow and the widowed sister. There was no contest and on the other hand there was a petition purporting to have been made by the widow and the widowed sister consenting to the grant. On 11th August 1890 letters of administration were ordered to issue on the footing that there was no opposition, but there was...
Satish Chandra Pal Vs. Reshee Case Law
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-15-1932
Reported in: AIR1933Cal290
Guha, J.1. The history of the case giving rise to this appeal has been set out in detail in the judgment of the Court below, and it is not necessary to recapitulate the same for the purpose of the appeal now before us, excepting the fact that in a suit for rent for a previous period, 1329 to 1332 B.S., it was held that the defendant-appellant in this appeal was dispossessed from 120 bighas of land out of the total area of 2877 bighas comprised in the tenure in respect of which rent was claimed by the plaintiff-respondent. The claim in the suit out of which this appeal has arisen was for realization of arrears of rent for the years 1334 to 1336 A.S., as also for the period from Aswin to Chaitra 1336 B.S.; there was also the claim for cesses and damages. The defendant-appellant in this Court contested the plaintiff's claim on various grounds. The defence with which we are concerned in this appeal is the one which related to the dispossession by the plaintiff from a part of the tenure, di...
Sarat Chandra De Vs. Pramatha Nath Banerji and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-15-1932
Reported in: AIR1933Cal482,145Ind.Cas.295
Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff and arises out of a suit brought by him to enforce a mortgage security executed by defendant 1 for self and as certificated guardian of defendants 2 and 3 and of their eldest brother Motilal Chatterji since deceased in favour of the plaintiff on 24th July 1922 for a sum of Rs. 7000. Defendant 4 who is the only contesting defendant in the suit has been impleaded as he claims to have purchased the mortgage property in the year 1927 in execution of a money decree. The Subordinate Judge of 24-Parganas before whom the suit came up for trial dismissed the suit with costs against defendant 4 and decreed the suit against defendants 1 to 3 with costs, the decree against them being a simple money decree.2. It is against this decree that the present appeal has been brought. The questions of law which fall for determination in this appeal depend on facts which are not disputed and which may be shortly stated as follows: Premises No. 37, Chakraberia R...
Kailash Chandra and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1932
Reported in: AIR1932Cal651
Jack, J.1. This Rule has been issued upon the Chief Presidency Magistrate of Calcutta to show cause why the convictions of the petitioners should not be set aside or why such other or further order should not be made as to this Court may seem fit. The petitioners have been convicted of offences under Section 292 read with Section 120-B, I. P. C, on a charge of criminal conspiracy to publish, sell and distribute an obscene book (viz)., 'Ramsdar Atmakatha' in two editions referred to as editions 3 and 4. The first ground on which the Rule has been issued is that in view of the aims and objects of the author expressed in the preface and other chapters of the book the Magistrate ought to have held that the book is not obscene. The second ground is that on a valid and legal construction of the book in question the learned Magistrate ought to have held that the book does not come within the mischief of Section 292, I. P. C, and the third ground is that the sentences are too severe.2. The lea...
Hanuman Sarma Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1932
Reported in: AIR1932Cal723
Mallik, J.1. The appellant Hanuman Sarma has bean convicted under Section 354, I. P. C., and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs. 300. Hanuman was put on his trial on charges under Sections 376 and 354, I.P.C. The trial was held with the aid of four assessors. Two of the assessors found the accused not guilty, according to one the accused was guilty under Sections 376 and 354, I. P. C., while according to the fourth the accused was guilty under Sections 354 and 376/511, I. P. C. The learned Judge acquitted the appellant of the charge under Section 376, I. P. C., but convicted him of the charge under Section 354, I. P. C., and sentenced him in the way as stated before.2. The accused Hanuman Sarma is a young man of about 22 or 23 and the victim in the present case is a girl aged about 6. The case for the prosecution was briefly this: Ajodhya Prosad, the father of the girl whose name was Gumti on his way to office, left her on the road in the police bazar in ...
Pratapchandra Ghosh Vs. Ramanimohan Ghosh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1932
Reported in: AIR1933Cal377
Patterson, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for the ejectment of the defendants from a certain non-transferable occupancy holding, on the allegation that they are in possession thereof as trespassers. The original tenant was one Kamalkamini Debi. Defendant 2 is the daughter of Kamalkamini and defendant 1 is the husband of defendant 2. Defendant 3 is a bargadar in actual cultivating possession of the land in suit. In 1322 B.S. Kamalkamini executed a deed of gift in respect of certain properties, including the holding in suit, in favour of her daughter and her son-in-law, defendants 1 and 2. This was at or about the time of the marriage of defendant 1 to defendant 2, and since that time defendant 1, together with his wife, defendant 2, has been living with his mother-in-law Kamalkamini as gharjamai, and has been in possession of the land in suit by virtue of the deed of gift executed in his favour by Kamalkamini, and by realization of his share of the paddy grown on the land by the ...
Surendranath Ghosh Vs. Haridas Biswas and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1932
Reported in: AIR1933Cal398
Roy, J.1. This is a suit to realize mortgage securities. There are altogether five mortgages and two further charges involved in the suit. The mortgagor was one Haridas Biswas, who was originally defendant 1. He died on 5th January, 1932. On his death his infant sons were brought on the record and are now the first three defendants. The mortgage in favour of the plaintiff is dated 20th March 1927. All the other mortgages and further charges are subsequent in date to the mortgage of the plaintiff. Defendants 4 to 8 are the subsequent mortgagees. The mortgages have all been duly proved and in the normal course a mortgage decree in the usual form would follow.2. A question of priority has however been raised by the defendant Durgacharan Mitra. This has led to some further evidence being given and considerable argument being advanced, in the course of which various cases have been cited. The mortgage in favour of the defendant Durgacharan Mitra was executed on (SI) th June 1927, and regist...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »