Kolkata Court March 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.
Jyotishchandranarayan Ray and ors. Vs. Radhikachandranarayan Ray and o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal892
Jack, J.1. This appeal has arisen out of a suit for partition. The property in question consists of the bahir barhi of the parties, including certain tanks. There were three parties,, having ejmali properties, which were originally partitioned in 1269. The plaintiffs have a raiyati right in the one-third share of the original joint property. At the partition in 1269, the properties now in suit were kept joint. Subsequently, in 1918, the plaintiffs brought a title suit in respect of five plots of land which they claimed on the basis of a chita of 1267 and the bantaknama of 1269, by which the original partition was made. That suit of 1918 was compromised in 1920 and a decree was passed under the terms of which the plaintiffs and the defendants down to their heirs and representatives in interest should for ever observe and carry out the covenants contained in the deed of compromise, Ex. 3, in which it was noted that, subject to the modifications made therein, the terms of the bantaknama o...
Asraf Ali and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-15-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal426
Rankin, C.J.1. The accused before us are Asraf Ali and Ananta Kumar Sarkar. They have been convicted by the unanimous verdict of a jury of seven under Section 302 read with Section 109, I.P.C., and have been sentenced to death. We have before us a reference under Section 374, Criminal P.C., and an appeal by each of the two accused. Between 9 and 10 o'clock on the night of Monday, 28th March 1932, in a village called Panchgaon, an old man named Kalachand Banerjee, a woman called Hiran Moyee and a small girl called Sulakshana, aged about three were hacked or stabbed to death in Kalachand's bari and his nephew's wife, Nagendrabala Debi, was very seriously injured by a sharp cutting weapon. She had an incised wound 7 long round the left shoulder joint cutting the head of the left humerus in two; she had an incised wound at the back of her right wrist and another on the palm of her right hand. The case for the prosecution is that the accused Asraf Ali inflicted these wounds with a big dao i...
Nibaran Chandra Dutta Vs. Amar Chandra Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal419
Mukerji, J.1. This appeal has arisen out of a suit to eject the defendant under Section 49, Clause (a), Ben. Ten. Act, and for recovery of rent due from him for the years 1332 to 1334. The trial Court gave the plaintiff a decree for rent only; but the lower appellate Court, on appeal by the plaintiff, gave him a decree for ejectment as well. The defendant has appealed. The defendant held as an under-raiyat under a lease for nine years which ran from 1326 to 1334, and which he had obtained on payment of a selami. There was a renewal clause in the lease which ran in these words: 'On expiry of the term I shall possess the land after executing a fresh kabuliyat.' The suit was instituted on 11th July 1928(Ashar 1335). The trial Court held that the defendant was protected by this clause as to renewal. The Subordinate Judge held thus:This covenant was for the benefit of the tenant, but it gave him no right to the land unless he chose to take advantage of it in the manner prescribed therein by...
Kamini Kumar Choudhuri Vs. Sasanka Sekhar Choudhuri and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal814
Mallik, J.1. This rule is directed against an order made by the 3rd Munsif, Chittagong, whereby he refused to vacate an order made by him making rateable distribution of some money which was lying in his Court. What happened in the case was this: There were some surplus sale proceeds lying in the Court of the Munsif. This property was attached by several decree-holders in execution of their decrees. The learned Munsif made a rateable distribution of the money in his Court. Soon after that distribution had been made, the petitioner who obtained the present, rule and who also was a decree holder wanted to attach the money in execution of his decree and in that application he asked the learned Munsif to vacate his order for rateable distribution which he had already made. This application however was rejected by the learned Munsif; and that refusal order has given rise to this present rule.2. This rule should, in my opinion, succeed. The Court of the 3rd Munsif of Chittagong was only a cu...
Fanindra Kumar Das Vs. Rahat Bux Choudhury, and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal447
Panckridge, J.1. This Rule was issued on 15th August 1932 and calls on the District Magistrate of Midnapore and the opposite parties to show cause why the order of the Additional District Magistrate dated 13th June 1932, dismissing the petitioner's complaint under Section 203, Criminal P.C., should not be set aside. The opposite parties are described as:Rehat Bux Choudhury, Sub-Inspector of Police, and Sheikh Kalu,. Police Constable, and two other Police Constables of Midnapore Thana.2. On 30th April 1932 Mr. Douglas, the District Magistrate was assassinated at Midnapore. At about 11 p.m. that night the petitioner who describes himself as a 'home internee' was arrested and taken to the Midnapore Thana. It is admitted that he was then to all appearance in good health. He was produced before a Deputy Magistrate on 1st May, and on 2nd May remanded by the Additional District Magistrate to police custody until 5th May. Later in the evening of 3rd May the Civil. Surgeon, Captain Drummond, wa...
Jiban Krishna Chakrabarty Vs. Abdul Kader Chowdhury
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal435
Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal against an order of the Additional District Judge of Chittagong remanding a suit to the Court of the Subordinate Judge of that district for retrial in accordance with law. The suit in which this appeal arises was brought by the plaintiff, now appellant, for a declaration of plaintiff's raiyati right to the lands mentioned in the plaint and for eviction of the defendant from the same. There is also a prayer for recovery of the rent in kind with damages and mesne profits. Plaintiff alleged that there was a service of notice upon the defendant under Section 49, Ben. Ten. Act, but as the defendant refused to vacate, the present suit has been brought. The defence to the suit is that no notice was served on him and that the defendant had acquired permanent rights in the under-tenancy. Several issues were framed in the suit and the Court of first instance found that as the pottah granted by the plaintiff creating a kaimi dar raiyati right in the defendant offend...
Assam Bengal Ry. Co., Ltd. Vs. Hari Mohun Pal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal440
Rankin, C.J.1. Dinanath, father of the defendants held the land in suit on what I will assume to be a lease. He held it under an instrument dated 11th September 1919 which was not registered though it purported to be for a period of ten years (subject to three-months' notice on either side) from 14th July 1917. Dinanath died in November 1918 and the defendants as his heirs continued his possession. On 7th December 1926 the defendants applied for a temporary lease and offered to pay in advance the annual rent to be fixed by the agent. They deposited Rs. 25, as advance rent with their proposal form as well as Rs. 10, for stamps for their new agreement. Their proposal form made no reference to the lease of Dinanath. On 1st April 1927, that is before the original term of Dinanath had expired, they received from the plaintiffs a letter saying:the lease granted to your father Dinanath Pal which was subsequently cancelled has again been given to you at an annual rent of Rs. 25 for ten years.2...
Altap Ali and ors. Vs. Srish Chandra Dutta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal864,147Ind.Cas.740
Guha, J.1. The plaintiffs in the three suits in which these three appeals have arisen, prayed for realisation of arrears of rent for the period for 1335 to the Bhadra Kist of 1338 B.S., in respect of three tenancies. In addition to the claims for recovery of arrears of rent for the period mentioned, there was a prayer for enhancement of rent on the ground of rise in prices, as provided by Section 30, Ben. Ten, Act. The tenants defendants raised various questions in resisting the plaintiff's claim for rent as made in the suits. It was pleaded that the suits were not maintainable, and that the defendants did not hold the jamas in respect of which rents were claimed, under the plaintiffs. As indicated by the Court of appeal below, the question of the maintainability of the suits for recovery of arrears of rent, as also the question of the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties, were the main questions at issue between the plaintiffs and the defendants. The trial Court obs...
Govinda Prosad Shah and anr. Vs. Sreemutty Charusila Dassi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1933
Reported in: AIR1933Cal875,147Ind.Cas.1238
Rankin, C.J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff from the decree of Pankridge, J., dismissing his suit. The premises, No. 187 Darmahatta Street, form part of the estate of the late Akhoy Kumar Ghose of which the defendant is the administratix. From 1910 these premises were let to the firm of Kalicharan Udit Narayan as monthly tenants. These monthly tenants having erected certain pucca buildings thereon, assigned or conveyed to the plaintiff their interest in the premises and in the structures by a deed dated 8th December 1921. In December 1927, the defendant having brought an ejectment suit, obtained possession of the premises in execution, but the decree in ejectment was, by consent, vacated on 3rd February 1928 by an order passed in appeal therefrom.2. In connexion with these proceedings the present plaintiff, on 21st December 1927, had by his solicitors written denying the right of the landlady to the structures. Although the decree had been vacated, the plaintiff never got back po...
Dasarathi Kumar Vs. Sarat Chandra Ghose and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1933
Reported in: AIR1934Cal135
Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal on behalf of the plaintiff and arises in a suit in ejectment. The only question which has been debated before us is the question as to the necessity and sufficiency of the notice to quit. It appears that the defendant was holding under two leases which he had obtained from Raja Peary Mohan Mukherjee on 7th Aswin 1320 B. S., in respect of two different plots. The leases were for a term of nine years and they expired on 16th September 1922 corresponding to the end of Bhadra 1329 B. S. The case made by the defendant is that he held over after the expiry of the leases. The plaintiff, it appears, subsequently got an intermediate lease from the Raja on 27th Pous 1331 corresponding on 11th January 1925. After obtaining the said lease the plaintiff issued a notice to quit on the defendant and that was served on 9th April 1925. The notice required the defendant to quit on 30th Aswin corresponding to 16th October 1925. The suit in ejectment was commenced on 1st Mar...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »