Kolkata Court December 1935 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.
Krishna Chandra Rudrapal Vs. Khan Mamud Bepari and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-13-1935
Reported in: AIR1936Cal51
R.C. Mitter, J.1. This appeal is on behalf of the defendant and arises out of a suit instituted by the plaintiffs to recover from him a sum of Rs. 475 (with interest) paid to him on the basis of a contract by which the latter agreed to sell to the plaintiffs a piece of land. The contract was an oral one, entered into on 28th Kartick 1335. By it the price was fixed at Rs. 1,375. It is the plaintiff's case that at the date of contract Rs. 375 were paid by them as earnest money and later on a further sum of Rs. 100 was paid in part payment of the price. There is nothing to show that the last mentioned sum was paid by way of earnest. The plaintiffs came to Court with the case that the balance of the price was to be paid in the month of Magh 1335 at the time of the conveyance, but before that, that is, at some time in Pous 1335, the defendant refused to sell. The defence is that the time for completion according to the contract was Aughrahan 1335 and that the conveyance, was not executed by...
Sureudra Nath Roy Vs. Kedar Nath Bose and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-13-1935
Reported in: AIR1936Cal87
D.N. Mitter, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for specific performance of a contract to sell. The plaintiff is the purchaser in whose favour the contract has been entered into by defendant 1. The suit has been dismissed by the Subordinate Judge. Hence the present appeal by the plaintiff. The case of the plaintiff is that defendant 1, Kedar Nath Bose, who is now the owner of a portion of the house known as Raja Bahadur's Haveli purported to sell the portion which is still left with him for a sum of Rs. 7,000. The case is that the contract to sell was entered into between the present plaintiff and the son of Kedar Nath Bose, Kali Das who has been described throughout these proceedings as Felu whom Kedar Nath Bose empowered to deal in the matter of the sale. The plaintiff in pursuance of certain correspondence to which reference will be made hereafter sends his kinsman and nephew Rash Behary Roy to the residence of defendant 1 at Calcutta, and according to the direction of defendant ...
Maharaj Bahadur Singh Vs. MafizuddIn Chowdhury and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-13-1935
Reported in: AIR1936Cal238
ORDERR.C. Mitter, J.1. The petitioner before me obtained a decree for rent against the judgment debtor opposite party. He put in an application by which he wanted the moveables of the judgment-debtor to be attached in the first instance and if the money was not realised by the attachment of the moveables, he wanted to sell the defaulting tenure. While this application was pending certain moneys to which the judgment-debtor was entitled were deposited in Court. On that the decree-holder made an application for attachment of those moneys. The Munsif said that inasmuch as the writ to attach the moveables had been sent over to the Nazir, he could not allow the attachment of the moneys to be effected till that writ was recalled. On the said assurance and on the faith that the decree-holder would be given the attachment of the money, he made an application to the Court for recalling the said writ that had already been issued to the Nazir and it was accordingly recalled. But the learned Munsi...
Ebrahim Peer Mohamed Vs. Kissen Gopal Bagree and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-13-1935
Reported in: AIR1937Cal180
Ameer Ali, J.1. This is a difficult matter, both, on account of the state of our law on the subject of trusts, and on account of the very peculiar facts. I would, therefore, have preferred to give a written judgment. I propose to give judgment now because I anticipate that in this case the parties having spent so much on a point of principle, will probably desire to obtain the decision of a Higher Court.2. A. Facts.-I will deal first with the facts. The history of the matter may be conveniently divided into stages. The first stage is represented by the document itself, the deed of 21st August 1929. That is the first and most important fact in the case. I shall have to deal with the nature and provision of the deed in considerable detail. I will merely state now that it purports to be made-between Ratilal, a trader in financial difficulties, seven persons named as trustees of whom the majority were creditors, and of whom the defendant Kissen Gopal Bagree is one. The others or their repr...
In Re: Pabna Dhonabhander Co., Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-13-1935
Reported in: 165Ind.Cas.108
McNair, J.1. This is an application by the Pabna Co-operative Urban Co., Ltd., one of the creditors of the Pabna Dhonobhander Co., Ltd., in liquidation for an order that the Official Liquidators of the Company in liquidation be removed and competent persons be appointed in their place to complete the winding up of the Company. An enquiry is also asked into the affairs of the winding-up and for the winding-up proceedings to be transferred from this Court to the District Court of Pabna.2. The order for the winding up of the Company now in liquidation was made on November 18, 1929. On December 16, 1929, the present liquidators Magmata Nath Banner and Agenda Aryan Maunder, were appointed Official Liquidators of the Company.3. On April 8, 1930, the liquidators obtained an order for an increase of staff and for permission to spend Rs. 1,000 a month to meet the costs of management. Further leave was granted to them to raise a loan not exceeding Rs. 5,000 to meet the expenses of liquidation an...
Surendra Nath Roy Vs. Kedarnath Bose and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-13-1935
Reported in: 161Ind.Cas.224
D.N. Mitter, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for specific performance of a contract to sell. The plaintiff is. the purchaser in whose favour the contract has been entered into by defendant No. 1. The suit has been dismissed by the Subordinate Judge. Hence the present appeal by the plaintiff. The case of the plaintiff is that defendant No. 1, Kedar Nath Bose, who is now the owner of a portion of the house known as Raja Bahadur's Haveli purported to sell the portion which is still left with him for a sum of Rs. 7,000. The case is that the contract to sell was entered into between the present plaintiff and the son of Kedar Nath Bose, Kali Das who has been described throughout these proceedings as Felu whom Kedar Nath Bose empowered to deal in the matter of the sale. The plaintiff in pursuance of certain correspondence to which reference will be made hereafter sends his kinsman and nephew Rash Behary Roy to the residence of defendant No. 1 at Calcutta, and according to the direction ...
indra Chandra Bag and ors. Vs. Hiralal Bong and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-12-1935
Reported in: AIR1936Cal127
R.C. Mitter, J.1. The appeal is on behalf of defendants 3, 4 and 8 in a suit instituted by the plaintiff to recover from them and other defendants a sum of Rs. 800. The Court of first instance passed a decree against the other defendants but dismissed the suit against defendants 3, 4 and 8; but the lower appellate Court has modified that decree and has given a decree to the plaintiff against all the defendants, hence this appeal by defendants 3, 4 and 8. The plaintiff came to Court with a case that the defendants borrowed from him a sum of Rs. 400 on 31st January 1930. On that date the defendants executed a promissory note in favour of the plaintiff, but the said promissory note being insufficiently stamped has not been admitted in evidence. The plaintiff accordingly based this case on the original consideration. The Court of appeal below has found that a sum of Rs. 400 was in fact taken as a loan by all the defendants from the plaintiff. This finding has been arrived at by the lower a...
Ali HossaIn Shaikh and anr. Vs. Jonabali Mondal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-12-1935
Reported in: AIR1936Cal770
R.C. Mitter, J.1. This appeal is on behalf of defendants 1 and 2 and arises out of a suit for recovery of arrears of rent for the year 1336 B.S. and the Ashar kist of 1337. The plaintiffs came to Court with the case that the defendants were Ijaradars under them for five years commencing from 1335 B.S. and that the rent payable by them is Rs. 475 a year. The case of the defendants is that they are raiyats and the rent is not Rs. 475 but Rs. 234-13-0 a year. An issue was framed as to the status of the defendantSection The lower appellate Court has come to a finding that the defendants are Ijaradars as alleged by the plaintiffs and that their right to remain on the property demised had ceased in the year 1339. Having regard to the fact that it is a suit for recovery of arrears of rent, I am of opinion that it is not necessary to go into the question of status and that question ought to have been left open by the lower appellate Court. Both Mr. Roy Choudhury and Mr. Gupta agree that the sa...
NaraIn Chandra Biswas and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-11-1935
Reported in: AIR1936Cal101
1. The appellants, seven in number, were tried by a special Magistrate at Rangpur, appointed by the Local Government, under Section 24, Bengal Act 12 of 1932, for commission of offences under the Indian Arms Act, and under Section 120-B, I. P. C., and on conviction, sentenced to various terms of rigorous imprisonment. All the appellants were charged with offences of the following description. That they between June 1933, and December 1934 at Gaibandha agreed with one another and with others, to have in their possession or under their control revolvers, pistols and guns in contravention of Section 14 and Section 15, Arms Act, and thereby committed offence punishable under Section 19 (f), Section 19-A, Arms Act, read with Section 120-B, I. P. C. The appellants Nagendra Mohan Mustafi and Paresh Chandra Choudhury were charged separately for possession and control of a revolver, Ex. 11 in the case, in a manner indicating an intention that such control and possession might not be known to an...
J.E. Gubbay Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-11-1935
Reported in: AIR1936Cal65
ORDER1. The facts and circumstances of the case giving rise to the applications on which these Rules were issued may be briefly stated: An investigation in which the complicity of the petitioners in the matter of offences contemplated by Section 46, Bengal Excise Act, has been started by the Excise authorities, and the petitioners were during the course of such investigation arrested. On furnishing bail to the satisfaction of the Magistrate before whom the petitioners were placed after their arrest, they were released from custody. At a time when they were on bail an Inspector of Excise applied to the Magistrate for permission to take measurements and photographs of the petitioners, and it was mentioned in the application that measurements and photographs were required for the purpose of the investigation. The application for taking measurements and photographs was made under Section 5, Identification of Prisoners Act, and the Magistrate in his order recorded on 1st November 1935 state...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »