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.
Benarasidas Khandelwal and anr. Vs. Angira Debi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-21-1933
Reported in: AIR1934Cal33
Rankin, C.J.1. This is an appeal from an order made on 20th July last by my learned brother Ameer Ali, J., restraining the appellants Benarasidas Khandelwal and another from further proceeding with suit No. 2075 of 1923. It appears that the appellants are persons who were doing certain business in partnership with one Raghumull Khandelwal and that Raghumull Khandelwal filed suit No 2075 of 1923 on 12th July 1923 against the appellants asking for partnership accounts. It does not appear that there were any partnership assets which required winding up, but the claim was that a large sum of money would be due to Raghumull from the appellants if the accounts of the partnership transaction were properly taken. Some short time afterwards the appellants began a cross suit against Raghumull Khandelwal at Delhi, but this suit was stayed. Raghumull died on 5th September 1926. I may say here that there is very little doubt that Raghumull died a rich man. He had a number of large assets, but he ap...
Taraprasanna Ray Vs. Faridunnessa Khatun
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-20-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal703,147Ind.Cas.216
Mukerji, J.1. This appeal has arisen out of a suit for rent. The plaintiffs, who are the appellants, ask for a decree for interest at a rate higher than what is allowed by Section 67, Ben. Ten. Act, on the basis of a stipulation contained in the kabuliyat, which created a permanent mokarrari lease in a permanently settled estate under a permanent tenure-holder and is dated 1283 B.S. The Courts below have allowed interest at 12 per cent per annum. The suit was instituted on 15th April 1929, that is to say, after the date when the amending Act came into force. The claim was for 1332 to 1335, the major part of the claim being for a period antecedent to that date.2. Prior to the amendments, the clause as to interest was a clause of Sub-section (3), Section 178. From the position it then occupied, it meant that a rate of interest in excess of what is provided for in Section 67 was not affected by the provision of that section, if the rate was in a contract made before the passing of the Act...
Nutbehari Sarkar Vs. Saroda Prosad Chowdhury and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-15-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal358
Pearson, J.1. This was a warrant case before the Magistrate. Summons was issued under Section 323, I.P.C. Some of the witnesses were examined and charges framed. The ease was ultimately adjourned till 28th June 1932. In the meantime it appears that certain negotiations for settlement had been going on, which had previously been brought to the notice of the Magistrate. On that particular day 28th June, when the case was called on, the parties did not appear and the Magistrate thought that it was due to the fact that the settlement had materialized and that the parties had made up their differences. Accordingly, he dealt with the case under Section 258, Criminal P.C., and recorded an order of acquittal. Strictly speaking, there is no doubt that this order cannot be justified. The mere fact of the absence of the accused or complainant would not warrant an order of this kind to be made. The learned District Magistrate with reference to the present rule says that he is not in a position to ...
Jatindra Nath Raha and ors. Vs. Kali Kista Roy Choudhury and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-15-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal416
Mallik, J.1. The two suits which have given rise to the present appeals were for enhancement of rent, in respect of two tenures trader Section 7, Ben. Ten. Act. The defence in the case was that the tenures were mukarrari and therefore not liable to enhancement of rent. Both the Courts below found against the defendants on this point and they held that the tenures were not mukarrari but were liable to enhancement of rent. The Court of first instance allowed enhancement to the 'plaintiff's and in determining the assets of the defendants calculated the value of the paddy at the rate of Rs. 9 per shola. Against this decision there were appeals preferred by the defendants and the lower appellate Court remanded the cases to the Court of first instance giving some directions in its judgment as to the way in which the assessment of the rent in kind should be made. Against this decision the plaintiffs have come up to this Court in second appeal.2. A preliminary objection was raised before us th...
Krishna Mohan Kundu Vs. Nripendra Nath Nandi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-15-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal662,147Ind.Cas.314
Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal against an order of the Subordinate Judge of 24-Perganas dated 22nd March 1930 by which he refused to set aside a sale held in execution of a mortgage decree. The appeal is on behalf of Krishna Mohan Kundu who is one of the several judgment-debtors in the case. It appears that the respondents who will be described as the Nandys in this proceeding obtained a mortgage decree for a sum of about Rs. 88,800 against the appellant and several other persons on 26th March 1929. The Nandys applied to execute the said decree on 15th April 1929 and in execution of the said decree purchased some of the mortgaged properties on 23rd August 1929 for the sum of Rs. 69,000. On 19th September Krishna Mohan who is judgment-debtor 3 applied to set aside the Bale held on 23rd August 1929. The properties were sold in four lots, i.e., lots Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 on 21st and 22nd August for Rs. 69,000 and the decree-holder purchased all the properties. The petition to set aside the s...
Mohamed Ismail and anr. Vs. Lal Mia (Muktear)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-15-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal784
Guha, J.1. The first point raised in this case that the opposite party should have proceeded by way of an application under Section 26-J, Ben. Ten. Act, and that no suit as framed was maintainable, is covered by authority of decisions of this Court, and must be decided in favour of the petitioners. The second point arising for consideration in this case, which is one of the grounds on which this Rule was granted, is that no appeal lay against the decision of the learned Munsif passed in the case, and that the decision of the Court of appeal below, reversing that of the learned Munsif, was without jurisdiction.2. In view of the fact that the suit was one cognizable by a, Court of Small Causes, and that the Munsif who was invested with the powers of a Judge of the Court of Small Causes was competent to try the suit as a Small Cause Court Judge, the appeal against the decision of the Munsif was incompetent and the decision of the appellate Court was therefore without jurisdiction: This po...
Devendra Nath Mazumdar Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal333
Pearson, J.1. This Rule was issued on the Deputy Commissioner of Sylhet calling on him to show cause why the conviction and sentence passed on the petitioner's daughter and the other accused should not be set aside. It appears that the two accused in the case were two ladies, named Probhabati Dhar and Suro bala Dey, and that they were convicted and sentenced under Section 4, Ordinance 5 of 1932 to undergo six months' rigorous imprisonment each and a fine of Rs. 150 each. In default of the payment of the fine they were to undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment in each case. The decision of the Magistrate was given on 16th February 1932. Neither of the accused appealed against the decision, but an application was made on 1st March 1932 by the present applicant, the father of one of the accused, to the Sessions Judge of Sylhet. That Judge decided that he should not go into the merits and that it was not open to him to entertain an application of that nature made by a third person.2. Th...
Chuni Lal Vs. Corporation of Calcutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal732
ORDERGuha, J.1. The petitioner in this case is the proprietor of an electric mill, by which dal is manufactured at premises No. 3, Sonar Gouranga Temple Lane, in Calcutta. The Corporation of Calcutta, it appears, by a declaration duly made and published in the Local Gazette in the year 1925, notified that no person shall, in the area in which the above premises were situate, use any premises for dal grinding business, carried on by electric, steam or other mechanical power (other than hand power), and a prosecution was started against the petitioner under Section 488(2) read with Section 387(5), Calcutta Municipal Act, for continually working the dal-mill by electricity, in contravention of the declaration published in the Gazette under Section 387. The defence of the petitioner was that Section 387 was not applicable without reference to Section 386(1)(a), in view of the position that dal is not grain according to the interpretation put upon the word by this Court, that the petitioner...
Bankim Behary Maiti Vs. Prabodh Chandra Maity
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-1933
Reported in: AIR1934Cal284
Guha, J.1. The only question arising for consideration in this appeal is whether an amount of money, lying in deposit in the Postal Savings Bank, which, represents savings out of the income of the property allotted to a Hindu widow for her maintenance, were to be treated as accretion to the estate of her husband. If it were such an accretion, the plaintiff in the suit, out of which this appeal has arisen, is entitled to get the money in suit as executor and legatee. If on the other hand, the savings out of the income of the property which was allotted for her maintenance, was the widow's separate property, the defendant was entitled to get the same. The material clauses in the will by which property was allotted to the widow for her maintenance are Clauses 4, 8 and 12,. By the last of these clauses, that is Clause No. 12, the plaintiff was to get the property on the demise of the widow without any mention of savings, if any, out of the income of the property made by the widow in her li...
Ambika Charan De and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-10-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal361
ORDER1. This is an application made by one Mr. Ambika Charan De, described as the Joint Secretary of the District Bar Association, Sylhet. He has obtained this Rule on behalf of 23 persons who were tried by the Extra Assistant Commissioner, Sylhet, and convicted of offences puhishable under Sections 145 and 151, I.P.C. They have been sentenced to various terms of imprisonment ranging from two years rigorous imprisonment under Section 145 to six months rigorous imprisonment under Section 145. They have all been in addition sentenced to-six months under Section 151, but the Extra Assistant Commissioner directed that in each case the sentences should run concurrently. It appears that the accused persons on 26th January 1932, formed a procession which started from the Congress Office in the town of Sylhet. They are said to have proceeded in such a way that the traffics was not obstructed. When they reached the Government Muslim Hostel, they were met by a party of police officers under the ...