Kolkata Court February 1933 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.
Ashutosh Choudhury Vs. Sm. Kumed Kamini Dasi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-22-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal422
Mitter, J.1. This is really an unfortunate case for although the merits of the case are in favour of the appellant we are constrained to arrive at a decision adverse to him on the ground of limitation. It appears that one Hari Sadhan Panja obtained a decree for rent against Asutosh Chowdhury and his cosharers in Rent Suit No. 876 of 1916. One Bhagaban Chandra Pan had the decree assigned to him and he applied for execution of the decree in the year 1920 by sale of the rent property. In that execution the holding in question was sold and it was purchased by a lady of the name of Kumud Kamini Dasi for a price of Rs. 1,255 on 27th July 1920. The sale was confirmed in August. Two of the judgment-debtors, one of whom was an infant, applied on 27th July 1923 under Order 21, Rule 90, Civil P. C, for setting aside the sale. At all subsequent stages this application under Order 21, Rule 90 was prosecuted by Jamini Kanta Chowdhury alone. The application to set aside the sale was allowed in the fi...
In Re: Ernest Clarence O'Brien
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-22-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal701,147Ind.Cas.422
ORDERLort-Williams, J.1. The 'Provident Fund for the Permanent European Assistants of Grindlay & Co., Ltd., in India,' which is governed by rules, was created on 1st February 1928, with the object of providing members with a pension or payment on the termination of their service with the company (Rule 3).2. 'Member' means every European assistant in the service of the company in India who is a subscriber to the fund (Rule 2).3. Assistants engaged before 1st February 1923, had the option of joining it, if declared before 1st January 1930 (Rule 8).4. The fund is administered by trustees appointed by the company (Rule 4.)5. The fund is fed by payments made by the company and by compulsory deductions from the salaries of members (Rule 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 15 and 25).6. No member can make any claim upon the fund except as provided by the rules (Rule 18).7. He cannot receive (except ex gratia) any benefit from that part of the fund derived from payments made by the company until he has served t...
Alexander Brault Vs. Indrakrishna Kaul
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-22-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal706,147Ind.Cas.455
Lort-Williams, J.1. The plaintiff claims damages for malicious prosecution. He is a French subject, aged 76, and for 44 years has carried on business in Calcutta and is of unblemished reputation. Inter alia, he is sole agent for the sale in British India of certain petrol lamps known as 'Tito Landi' which he imports from Paris and of which he has sold more than 30,000. By a letter, dated 14th October 1929 the defendant, who is engineer to the Jharia Water Board, ordered one such Lampe de Grand Luxe, Art Bronze, as illustrated in plaintiff's catalogue and priced at Rs. 42, to be sent V.P.P., and this was sent the following day. On 30th October the defendant wrote, complaining that the petrol container of the lamp leaked, owing to a minute hole in the body of the container, where the metal was too thin and asking that another lamp should be sent in its place. The plaintiff asked that the lamp should be sent to him for inspection, and, on 5th November, the defendant sent back the lamp hav...
Kaluram Marwari Vs. Matilal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-22-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal715,147Ind.Cas.359
Rankin, C.J.1. In my opinion this appeal fails. A certain firm, which I will call the Mamraj firm, is said to have been dissolved in 1928, but, at any rate, in 1930, a suit was brought against it. The writ of summons was served by registered post, the postal package being refused. On 2nd March 1931 there was an ex parte decree for Rs. 4,500. On 6th April 1932, the defendants obtained at Asansol a decree against another firm called Gurmukhrai Ramgopal for a some-what larger sum of Rs. 5,432. On 12th April 1932 the plaintiff obtained, in the present suit, an interim injunction against the Mamraj defendants, restraining them from realizing this decree of Asansol. On 14th April it is said that the interim injunction was served. On 20th April the notice of motion was heard ex parte and the injunction was continued. On the same day, an order for attachment was made on the decree at Asansol, wherein the defendants in this suit were the decree-holders. On 25th April the defendants are said to ...
Brojendra Nath Ganguly Vs. Promatha Bhusan Dev and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-21-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal412
Mitter, J.1. This appeal is directed against an order of the Subordinate Judge of 24 Perganas dated 29th August 1930 by which he returned the plaint of the plaintiff, now appellant, in a partition suit valued at Rs. 3,80,101 to be filed in the proper Court. He made the order in the absence of the plaintiff' and held on such materials as had been put before him by defendant 6, Raja Promatha Bhusan Deb Ray of Naldanga, that the Alipur Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit as none of the properties which formed the subject-matter of partition lie within the jurisdiction of that Court. Hence the present appeal.2. Two questions have been debated before us in the appeal: (1) whether the Subordinate Judge should have proceeded to deal with the suit under the provisions of C.17,R.2 instead of proceedings under Order 17, Rule 3, Civil P.C.; (2) whether the materials before the Court were sufficient to justify the conclusion that the Alipur Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the pa...
Secy. of State Vs. Bhola Nath Mitra
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-21-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal409
Mallik, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of arrears of pay and gratuity. The suit was instituted by one Bhola Nath Mitra who was in service under the East Indian Railway Company and w330026his case was that when he was discharged on a certificate of unfitness on medical grounds, he asked for gratuity under Rule (SIC) of the rules for the grant of gratuities on retirement, to subordinate railway employees and his application was refused. The Courts below both held that the plaintiffs case was a case of discharge on the ground of unfitness on medical grounds and on that finding the lower appellate Court gave to the plaintiff a decree for Rs. 52 odd as arrear pay as also for Rs. 384 as gratuity. Against this decision the Secretary of State for India in Council who was impleaded in the Court of appeal below as a defendant on the devolution of the interest of the East Indian Railway Company on him, has appealed before us. A preliminary objection was raised on behalf of the...
Nirmala Bala Devi Vs. Bejay Pada Ganguly
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-21-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal675
Guha, J.1. This is a reference made by the learned District Magistrate of Howrah, recommending that certain orders purported to have been made under Section 488, Criminal P.C. be set aside for reasons stated by the learned Magistrate. The facts of the case leading up to the reference to this Court, have been placed before me by the learned advocates for the parties, and the orders which in the learned District Magistrate's opinion require revision by this Court have been commented upon in detail.2. On a very careful consideration of the materials placed before me, I am unable to agree with the learned District Magistrate that the original order passed by Mr. Fell, on 29th January 1932, fixing the maintenance allowance at Rs. 15 in pursuance of a settlement arrived at by the parties concerned, the husband and the wife, should be interfered with, in any way. The order was no doubt based on a compromise, but it could not on that account be held to be illegal. The order as made by Mr. Fell...
Pahar Ujalaba Co-operative Bank and ors. Vs. Adu Bhuia and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-21-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal695a,147Ind.Cas.177
ORDER1. This is a reference by the Munsiff 3rd Court, Narayangunj, Dacca, under Rule 1, C. 46, Civil P.C. Applications were made to his Court for the execution of certain awards of the Inspector of Co-operative Credit Societies appointed arbitrator by the Registrar of the Societies under Rule 22 framed under. Section 43, Act 2 of 1912 by the Bengal Government. The problem as it presented itself to the learned Munsiff was whether by the order passed under Section 43(2)(1) the jurisdiction of the civil Court was ousted and a special Court of final jurisdiction created for the trial of domestic disputes of the Societies or whether it was intended by the legislature that the award of the arbitrator should have the same effect as the award of an arbitrator appointed by the parties and that before any execution be possible the award should be filed in Court under the provisions of Sch. 2, Civil P.C. (Sections 20 and 21) and a decree obtained from the civil Court. Section 43(2)(1) of the Act ...
TahiruddIn Ahmad Vs. MasihuddIn Ahmad
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-21-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal716,147Ind.Cas.196
Rankin, C.J.1. In my opinion, this appeal must be allowed. The question is whether the wakfnama, made by one Maniruddin, on 12th May 1890, created a valid wakf. Now, first of all, the wakf says that certain parcels of property belong to him and that he hereby endows the said parcels of property, the estimated aggregate value of which is Rs. 15,000, as wakf according to Mahomedan law. He then prescribes that, as regards his dwelling house, No. 151, Masjidbarhi Street, it was to be used solely as a dwelling house after his death by his wife and his sons, etc., and for no other purpose and that none of them would be at liberty to alienate it. He says that the wakf property is not to be available to himself and his heirs. He undertakes, during his lifetime, to devote and apply one anna of the income of the property, other than the dwelling house, to charitable purposes and he reserves 15/16ths of the income for himself during his lifetime. He then declares that, after his death, his eldest...
Sundar Ram Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-21-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal752a
1. In this case the petitioner has obtained a rule calling upon the Chief Presidency Magistrate to show cause why he should not be admitted to bail during the pendency of the case mentioned in the petition. I was not a party to the issue of the rule, but my learned brother who was such a party states that the rule was issued for the purpose of giving the Crown and the accused an opportunity of discussing whether on the merits it was desirable that the accused should be enlarged on bail or kept in custody. I state this because at various times during the course of the argument questions have been raised as to the propriety of the orders made by the learned Presidency Magistrate from time to time under Section 344, Sub-section (1), Criminal P.C., postponing the commencement of the inquiry. It appears to me that we must deal with this case on the assumption that the orders for postponement were proper orders. The petition nowhere alleges that the Magistrate was wrong in so far as he postp...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »