Kolkata Court March 1934 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.
Harey Harey Sinha Chowdhury Vs. Saradindu Narayan Ray and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-1934
Reported in: AIR1934Cal642
Mallik, J.1. This appeal arises out of an application made by the landlord Under Section 105, Ben. Ten. Act, for settlement of a fair and equitable rent. The plaintiff's claim was resisted by the tenant defendant on the allegation that the holding in question was a mokurari one and that the rent was not liable to any enhancement and in support of this allegation the defendant filed a number of dakhilas the earliest of which was of the year 1248 B.S. and the latest of 1335 B.S. On the strength of these dakhilas the tenant claimed the presumption Under Section 50, Ben. Ten. Act. The Assistant Settlement Officer as also the special Judge refused to consider these dakhilas holding that Section 115, Ben. Ten. Act, operated as a bar and the Courts below in that view of the matter gave an increase of two annas and three pies in the rupee to the plaintiff, landlord. The defendant-tenant is the appellant before us. The order of refusal of the Courts below to consider the dakhilas filed by the t...
P.G. DombraIn and anr. Vs. Someswar Choudhury
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-1934
Reported in: AIR1934Cal698,152Ind.Cas.1005
1. In the case to which this Rule relates a certain witness for the prosecution was examined on commission at the instance of the complainant, but for reasons which it is not necessary to state here, no cross interrogatories were filed on behalf of the accused, and the commission together with the deposition of the witness, was returned to the trying Magistrate without there having been any cross-examination. The trial was then proceeded with and a charge Under Section 420, I.P.C., was in due course framed against the accused persons, the present petitioners. The petitioners thereafter applied to the trying Magistrate for the issue of a fresh commission for the cross-examination of the witness in question. The trying Magistrate made a recommendation to the District Magistrate for the issue of the commission prayed for, but the District Magistrate refused to issue a fresh commission on the ground that the petitioners had failed to furnish cross interrogatories in connexion with the firs...
A.D.M. Cotton Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1934
Reported in: AIR1934Cal604
Costello, J.1. This is an appeal on behalf of one who is described as A.D.M. Cotton. He was convicted by the Chief Presidency Magistrate of three several offences under the Factories Act 12 of 1911. The first charge was Under Section 41(a) read with Section 26 and the offence alleged was that of allowing persons to be employed in the factory after the prescribed hours. On that charge he was convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 100 or, in default, to under go six weeks' simple imprisonment. The second charge was Under Section 41(g) read with Section 18 and Rule 14 and that related to a failure to comply with an order given by the Factory Inspector to remedy certain defects as regards the fencing or guarding certain machines and plant used in the factory. The last charge was brought Under Section 36(1) which requires that there shall be affixed in some conspicuous place near the main entrance of a factory the prescribed abstracts of the Act and of the rules made under that Act. O...
In Re: United Provinces Electric Supply Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1934
Reported in: AIR1934Cal803,152Ind.Cas.601
Costello, J.1. This matter comes before us by way of a case stated under Section. 57 (1) Stamp Act (2 of 1899). It is concerned with the adjudication of stamp duty in respect of an indenture dated 5th March 1931 made between the Municipal Board of Lucknow on one side and the United Provinces Electric Supply Company Ltd. on the other. It appears that the Municipal Board of Lucknow was the owner of a certain piece of land which had been acquired by the Government of the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh for the Board under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act (10 of 1870) and a notification of the Government of the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh No. 2790/11/ 644A/2 dated 17th November 1892. For the purposes of carrying out a scheme of reorganisation of its waterworks the Board had obtained a loan from the Government of the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh of the sum of rupees 18,50,000 under the provisions of the Local Authorities Loans Act (9 of 1914). This loan was repayable ...
Shacheendrabhooshan Ray Vs. Pramathanath Ray
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1934
Reported in: AIR1934Cal781,152Ind.Cas.35
Lort Williams, J.1. This appeal arises out of a sale in execution of a mortgage decree. The mortgagor had mortgaged a one-sixth share in certain property, and in the sale proclamation it was stated that this one-sixth share of the property, which belonged to the judgment debtor, would be sold. Subsequently however a third party brought a suit against both the decree-holder and the judgment-debtor in this suit, stating that a part of the property belonged to him, and all that the judgment-debtor owned was a 12th share. That suit having been filed, an application was made to that Court asking for an injunction restraining the sale of the share of this property claimed by the plaintiff in that suit. An injunction was granted and communicated to the executing Court with the result that that Court made an order that the sale proclamation should be sent to the nazir for sale with the direction that a 12th share only of the properties mentioned therein should be sold. On this an application w...
Hormus Ardeshar Kandawala Vs. Ardeshar Cowashji Dustoor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Cal109
Remfry, J.1. In this suit the plaintiff, who carries on business as 'Bombay Dyeing and Cleaning Company,' seeks to restrain the defendant from carrying on business as 'Bombay Art Dyers and Cleaners,' and claims damages. The following issues were raised:(1) Is the plaintiff's business the 'Bombay Dyeing and Cleaning Company' known to the public as the 'Bombay Art Dyers and Cleaners?(2) Has the plaintiff acquired the sole right to the use of the word 'Bombay' in connexion with the dyeing and cleaning business or is it common in the trade?(3) Has the defendant lawfully adopted the name of the ''Bombay Art Dyers and Cleaners' and is he entitled to use the name?(4) Has the plaintiff suffered any damages as alleged in para. 7 of the plaint? Is he entitled to any account of the profits made by the defendant?2. The undisputed facts are that, in 1907, the plaintiff started a business as a dyer and cleaner at No. 1, Lindsay Street, on the ground floor, under the name of H. Ardeshar & Co. In 1908...
In Re Sir David Yules Estate.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1934
Reported in: [1935]3ITR163(Cal)
BUCKLAND, J. - This is a reference by the Commissioner of the Income Tax under Section 66 (1) of the Indian Income Tax Act, made in the following circumstances :Sir David Yule died on the 3rd July, 1928. He left in India an Estate of the value of approximately pounds 10,000,000. The executors and trustees appointed by the testator by his will are his widow, The Mercantile Bank of India Ltd., Sir Onkarmull Jatia and Radha Krishna Iyer. Probate of the will was granted to the executors other than Radha Krishna Iyer in England on the 28th October, 1928, and in Indian on the 7th June, 1929. Under the power of appointment contained in the will Lady Yule has appointed her daughter to be a trustee of the will. The present trustees therefore are Lady Yule, Miss Yule, Sir Onkarmull Jatia and the Mercantile Bank of India Ltd.The testators estate in India consisted substantially of holdings of shares in a number of companies most of them formed by him between the years 1917 and 1921 as private com...
Badri Narayan Chetlangia Vs. Abdul Mandal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Cal97
M.C. Ghose, J.1. Those are three appeals by the defendant landlord in throe suits which were instituted by three sets of utbandi tenants for fixing a 'uniform annual money-rent under Section 180-A, Ben. Ten. Act. In the trial Court the three suits were tried together. In the lower appellate Court the appeals arising out of the three suits were heard together and they have been argued together in this Court. The trial Court upon consideration of all the evidence fixed the annual rent at Re. 1-4-0 per bigha. The District Judge in appeal affirmed the decree of the trial Court. The defendant landlord appeals to this Court and the main ground is that the Courts below were wrong to fix the annual rent at Re. 1-4-0 per bigha and that on a proper consideration of the facts and circumstances they should have fixed the rent at a higher sum per bigha. A preliminary objection has been taken by the learned advocate on behalf of the tenants respondents that no appeal lies in this Court inasmuch as t...
Durga Das Das Vs. NalIn Chandra Nandan and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-09-1934
Reported in: AIR1934Cal694,155Ind.Cas.354
M.C. Ghose, J.1. These two appeal were argued by Mr. Sharat Chandra Rai Choudhuri on 15th February last. My learned brother on hearing him proposed to dismiss them summarily. I proposed to admit them for hearing. I do not propose to say more than certain of the arguments advanced by Mr. Rai Chaudhuri which inclined me in favour of admission of these appeals. He urged that the learned Subordinate Judge committed an error in making adverse remarks on the plaintiff's case. He should have noted that the plaintiff was a small child when his mother died and his elder sister, defendant 2, took care of him and defendant 1 who married her came to live as ghar jamai, and during his infancy they exercised their influence on him.2. During his minority, his case is that they and defendant 3 managed the estate and embezzled large sums of money and when he was 20 years old, they induced him to execute three deeds of release to the extent of one lac of rupees on the representation that his father desi...
Rivers Steam Navigation Co., Ltd. Vs. Khanta Kumari Banik and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-08-1934
Reported in: AIR1934Cal632
Mallik, J.1. This Rule is directed against an order of the Second Subordinate Judge of Dacca dated 24th June 1933, by which he allowed an application made by one Khanta Kumari Banik for permission to sue as a pauper. Khanta Kumari with three of her children was travelling in a motor-boat called the 'Meghna' on 17th January 1933, when due to negligent navigation of the Serang of the Steamer S.S. ''Mikir,' owned by the Rivers Steam Navigation Company Limited, there was a collision between the steamer and the motor launch, with the result that the motor-boat sank two of Khanta's children, one a boy aged about 12 and the other a girl of 5, were drowned, and Khanta herself lost her personal properties. On these allegations Khanta filed a plaint claiming damages against the Rivers Steam Navigation Company Limited, to the extent of Rs. 5,157, Rs. 3,250 on account of the loss of her two children and the bodily and mental pain sustained by her, and Rs. 1,907, on account of the loss of her perso...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »