Kolkata Court August 1934 Judgments
Emperor Vs. Nirmal Jiban Ghose and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-30-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Cal513,157Ind.Cas.387
Costello, J.1. By a Government of Bengal Notification dated 15th December 1933 a Special Tribunal was appointed by the Governor-in-Council under the provisions of sub-Ss. (1) and (2) of Section 4, Bengal Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1925, for the trial under that Act of thirteen persons who were accused of offences specified in Schedule 1 of the Act. The accused persons were the following: 1. Nirmal Jiban Ghose; 2. Kamakhya Charan Ghosh; 3. Brojo Kishore Chakravarty; 4. Ram Krishna Roy; 5. Sonatan Roy; 6. Nanda Dulal Singh: 7. Sukumar Sen Gupta; 8. Bijoy Krishna Ghose; 9. Purnananda Sanyal; 10. Manindra Nath Choudhury; 11. Saroj Ranjan Das Kanungo; 12. Santi Gopal Sen and 13. Sailesh Chandra. Ghose. When the trial of the case began the Commissioners were informed by the Public Prosecutor that one of the accused persons, namely Santi Gopal Sen, was absconding and could not be produced before the Tribunal. At the same time on an application made on behalf of the Crown the Commissioners te...
Tag this Judgment!Sawal Ram Agarwala and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-30-1934
Reported in: 153Ind.Cas.632
Patterson, J.1. The facts of the case to which these two Rules relate have been fully set forth in the judgment of the Appellate Court and I do net think it necessary to recapitulate them here. The convictions against which these Rules are directed are under Section, 6 read with Section 21, Bengal Food Adulteration. Act of 1919, and relate to two samples of mustard oil which were purchased by the Sanitary Inspector of the District of Rangpur from a shop situated within the Municipal limits of Gaibanda. Section 6 prohibits the sale of mustard oil which is not derived exclusively from mustard seed, but it was contended on behalf of the petitioners that this section should be read with Section 5, which would have the effect of introducing other consider rations. I am not prepared ,to accept this contention. Section 6 is, in; my opinion, an entirely distinct and self-contained section and ought to be interpreted as it stands. Its provisions are clear and all that the prosecution is require...
Tag this Judgment!BepIn Behary Shaw Vs. Bonbehary Shaw and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-29-1934
Reported in: 164Ind.Cas.218
McNair, J.1. There are two applications before the Court, one by the defendant Pulin Behary Shaw and Bijoy Kristo Shaw for an order that the Report of the Commissioner of Partition appointed herein be confirmed subject to a slight variation as to costs. The other application is an application by the plaintiff that the Report of the Commissioner may be varied or modified and be remitted for re-consideration.2. The defendants at the outset have taken the objection that the Report cannot now be varied because it has been confirmed by the effluxion of time, and they refer to Chap. XXVI, Rule 89, which is in the following words:An application to discharge or vary a certificate or report shall be made by motion upon notice to be given within 14 days from the date of the filing thereof or within such further time as may be obtained for that purpose but in that case the notice shall mention that it has bean given with the leave of the Court. An application for further time may be made by petit...
Tag this Judgment!ilu and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-28-1934
Reported in: AIR1934Cal847,153Ind.Cas.454
1. The abovenamed four appellants were tried by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge of Hooghly sitting with a jury on charges under Sub-section 344 and 366, I. P. C. The jury returned a unanimous verdict of guilty and the learned Judge agreeing has convicted them as above and sentenced the appellant Abdul Latif to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and each of the other appellants to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years and six months. The case for the prosecution shortly stated is as follows: The appellants are residents of Bagnan P. S. Polba in the District of Hooghly. One Kusum Bala Dasi, a woman aged 16 or 17 years who is P.W. 2 in the case was living at the time of the occurrence in the house of her brother Gokul P. W. 10. Her husband Keshab P. W. 8 was also living with her in the same house but at the time of the occurrence he was away. One day in Agrahayan 1339 B. S. at about 10 A. M. Kusum carried some food to the field where Gokul was working. While returning t...
Tag this Judgment!Rash Behari Sanyal Vs. Gosto Behari Goswami
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-28-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Cal243,155Ind.Cas.817
ORDERCostello, J.1. This matter arises in connection with an appeal sought to be filed by one Rash Behari Sanyal under Section 3(1), Calcutta Improvement (Appeals) Act 1911, from a decision of the President of the Calcutta Improvement Tribunal sitting alone by virtue of provisions of Section 77(1)(b), Bengal Act 5 of 1911. Of the parties to the appeal the appellant and the second and third respondents had been the claimants before the President of the Calcutta Improvement Tribunal in a case in which the question at issue was whether or not a sale which had been made by a lady Bhuban Mohini Debi of certain immovable property in Calcutta, had been made by her for legal necessity and so passed an absolute right in the property to the purchaser who was Gosto Behari Goswami, the first respondent to the appeal. The property which is the subject-matter of the proceedings had been acquired by the Calcutta Improvement Trust compulsorily and a sum of Rs. 6,339-6-0 had been awarded to Gosto Behar...
Tag this Judgment!B.N. Ry. Co. Ltd. Vs. Ruttanji Ramji and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-28-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Cal250,155Ind.Cas.727
Mitter, J.1. This is an application of the Bengal Nagpur Railway Company Limited for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council. It appears that a suit was brought against them by the plaintiffs now respondents to recover a sum of Rs. 1,66,493 odd on account of the price of the work done by the plaintiffs as members of a joint Mitakshara family for a certain construction known as Amda-Jamda branch of the said railway. That suit was decreed in part by the trial Court. There were appeals and cross-appeals against this decision to this Court. As a result of the appeal by the Railway Company the decree against them was reduced to a certain extent. The contention of the Railway Company is that they are not at all liable for any amount claimed in the suit, and so the Railway Company is not satisfied with the reduction of the claim against them by this Court.2. The decree of this Court is more (in) their favour than the decree made by the Court of first instance. The company have accordingly a...
Tag this Judgment!Srish Chandra Pal Choudhury Vs. Rajani Kanta Biswas and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-27-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Cal278,155Ind.Cas.812
Nasim Ali, J.1. These three appeals arise out of three applications under Section 180-A, Ben. Ten. Act, by the tenants for determination, of uniform annual money rent in respect of lands held by them under the utbandi system. The defence of the defendant landlord was that the applications were not maintainable in their present form and that the prayers, of the tenants were not sustainable under the law. The landlord also alleged that the lands were very much improved by the excavation of a khal for flow of excess water at his cost. The learned Assistant Settlement Officer, after consideration of all the materials which were placed before him by the parties, held that the rate of Re. 1-2-0 per bigha would be the fair rent for the lands in respect of which no kabuliyats were executed by the tenants and Rs. 2 would be the fair rent per bigha for the lands in respect of which kabuliyats were executed by the tenants. Appeals were then taken by the tenants to the Special Judge. The learned S...
Tag this Judgment!Probodh Lal Mukerjee Vs. Nilratan Adhikary
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-27-1934
Reported in: AIR1936Cal193
McNair, J.1. The plaintiff in this suit seeks to obtain a decree for a sum of Rs. 6,866 against the estate of Krishna Kishore Adhikary, deceased, in the hands of the persons whom he has impleaded as defendants. On 25th September 1929 Krishna Kishore Adhikary executed a promissory note for the sum of Rs. 5,000 payable to the plaintiff on demand with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum. On 29th April 1930 Krishna Kishore died leaving two widows as his heiresses. In his suit the plaintiff states in para. 2 of his plaint that Krishna Kishore had died leaving defendant 3, his widow, surviving him. He then states in para. 3 that he is informed that Krishna Kishore had left a will and appointed defendant 2 as his executor. In para. 4 he says the plaintiff has ascertained that defendants 1 and 2, the brothers of the deceased and defendant 3, his widow, are in possession of the assets of the deceased. He then sets out particulars of his claim and asks for a decree against the assets i...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Gobinda Chaudhury Vs. Secretary of State and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-24-1934
Reported in: AIR1937Cal574
S.K. Ghose, J.1. The plaintiff, who was successful in the Court of first instance but has lost in the Court of appeal below has preferred this appeal. Put quite shortly his case is as follows: He is the patnidar of Taraf Pabna, within Pargana Rokanpore, consisting of Mouzahs Gopalpur, Dilalpur, Raghabpur, Mukandpore, Brojonathpore and Arippur. This taraf formerly appertained to Touzi No. 485 of the Rajshahi Colleotorate and at present appertains to Touzi No. 692 of the Maldah Collectorate. He pays a putni rent of Rs. 4,500 a year for the taraf to defendant 2, the zamindar. A total area of 58'8025 acres of lands, corresponding to about 180 bighas, were assessed by the Government in 1924 which he believes are really lands which had been permanently settled and included in the Touzi and are not additional or added lands. This assessment was made as the result of diara proceedings taken on the basis of the Cadastral Survey and Settlement of 1919 to 1922. The diara proceedings were started ...
Tag this Judgment!KasimuddIn and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-24-1934
Reported in: AIR1934Cal853
S.K. Ghose, J.1. The five appellants were placed on their trial with one Jamir Dai before the Assistant Sessions Judge of Dinajpur, Mr. S. S. E. Hattisngadi, and a jury on a charge Under Section 395, I. P.C. The jury brought in a mnanimous verdict of guilty as against these appellants. The learned Judge agreeing with that verdict has convicted the appellants as aforesaid and sentenced each of them to rigorous imprisonment for five years. The prosecution case shortly stated is that on 21st November 1933 there was a dacoity in the house of one Mobarak Ali. The dacoits, about 10 to 15 in number, forced their way into the house, assaulted the inmates, and took away ornaments and money. Some of the appellants were recognized as being among the dacoits. One Jamardi, husband of the sister of Mobarak, went to the thana and lodged the first information. Thereupon the police investigated and recovered some articles, alleged to have been stolen, from some of the appallants and one of them Kasimud...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »