Kolkata Court February 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.
Shib Krishna Sinha Sarma and ors. Vs. Atarjan Khan and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-28-1935
Reported in: 164Ind.Cas.175
1. This Rule arises out of an application for distribution of rent under Section 88 of the Bengal Tenancy Act and the relevant facts are these. There is a tenure bearing a rental of about Rs. 50. The opposite parties Nos. 1 and 2 having purchased 2 as. 13 gandas 1 kr., 1 krant share of that tenure made the application for distribution of rent in their share. The opposite parties Nos. 3 and 4 are the other co-sharer tenants and the remaining opposite parties are the landlords. The application was resisted by the present petitioners who are the opposite parties Nos. 1 to 7 and they stated that the rent of the tenure was being collected separately by the petitioners and the co-sharer landlords, the rent in petitioners' share being Rs. 30-4 and odd gandas, that in the share of opposite party No. 5 being Rs. 4-6 and odd gandas, that in the share of opposite parties Nos. 6 to 10 being Rs. 1-12 and odd gandas, and that in the share of opposite parties Nos. 14 to 21 being annas 9 and 10 gandas...
Tahir Ali Vs. Abdul Goni Doctor and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-27-1935
Reported in: 163Ind.Cas.618
Derbyshire, C.J.1. This appeal must be allowed. The Subordinate Judge reversed an order of Mr. Roy--the Munsif, 1st Court of Sylhet which was dated July 5, 1933. The facts of the case shortly are these: A decree was obtained against the judgment-debtor. That decree was assigned to Tanir Ali--the present appellant. The assignee of the decree took steps to execute the decree and liberty was given by the Munsif--the first Court--to him to execute it. That order was then appealed against and the Subordinate Judge found that the assignment was not an out and out assignment of the decree but that it was a benami transaction. In my view it does not make any difference whether that was a benami transaction or whether it was an out and out assignment. The judgment-debtor could only have execution, levied upon him once by the Nazir and then the decree was satisfied. As for as he is concerned, he can not complain that one person levied against him rather than another person levied against him. A ...
Rohini Kumar Roy Vs. Krishna Prosad Roy Choudury
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-27-1935
Reported in: 163Ind.Cas.680
R.C. Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal on behalf of the judgment-debtor. His objection to the execution of a decree passed as far back as February 9, 1927, has been overruled by the lower Appellate Court. The decree was passed in favour of several persons. On February 12, 1929, an application for execution was put in. The final order was passed on that application on May 10, 1929. On April 11, 1932, there was an application for transfer of the decree for execution and on that application being granted, the decree was transferred to the District of 24-Parganas. The properties falling within the jurisdiction of Munsif of Sealdab, an application for execution was put in before him by one of the decree-holders on September 19, 3932. In that application the prayer was for execution not of the whole decree but in respect of the share of the applicant, that is to say, the application was not in the form prescribed by Order XXI Rule 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The judgment-debtor who had b...
Nil Kantha Pal Vs. Bisakha Pal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-25-1935
Reported in: AIR1935Cal546,157Ind.Cas.1031
Costello, J.1. In this case the petitioner Nil Kantha Pal was convicted on his own plea of guilty of a charge which originally was laid under Section 304 but subsequently altered to one under Section 325, I.P.C. The petitioner by his plea of guilty acknowledged criminal responsibility for the death of one Akshoy Hari Pal who was the husband of Srimati Bisakh Pal who is a respondent in these proceedings. The killing of Akshoy Hari Pal was no doubt done in course of a quarrel and in the heat of the moment. The fact remains however that the blow struck by Nil Kantha, although the instrument used was merely a stick about an inch in diameter and two feet in length, was of such gravity that Akshoy Hari's skull was fractured, and he died within some eight hours after he had received this injury. The post-mortem report shows that there was a linear fracture of the skull extending from the front of his head backwards, a length of about seven inches. It is to be seen therefore that the blow stru...
istahar Khondkar and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-25-1935
Reported in: AIR1936Cal796
Lort-Williams, J.1. In this case six men were charged with dacoity namely, Istahar Khondkar, Maijuddi, Azahar Ali, Adam Ali, Sonatan Patikar and Umacharan Patikar and one Jamini Kanta Nath, under Section 412, I. P. C. Two of them were acquitted, namely, Sonatan and Jamini, all the rest the jury found guilty of offences under Section 412. These five have appealed from jail. The learned Judge appears to have directed the Jury that if they thought that there was not sufficient evidence of dacoity, but that there was evidence that the accused dishonestly received or retained stolen property knowing it to have been transferred by the commission of dacoity or received from dacoits, they might find them guilty under Section 412, although no charge under this section had been made against any one of them, with the exception of Jamini. Of the five accused who have appealed from jail one, Umacharan Patikar, has been represented by Mr. Satindra Nath Mukerji. The rest are unrepresented. The point ...
Alef Sheikh and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-25-1935
Reported in: 163Ind.Cas.768
M.C. Ghose, J.1. The four petitioners in this case were tried by a jury in the Court of the Assistant Sessions Judge of Khulna, on charges under Sections 147, 301, read with Section 34 and Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code. The jury by a unanimous verdict found all the four accused men guilty under Section 147, second part of Section 304, and Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code; accepting that verdict the trial Judge sentenced the petitioner Alef Sheikh to rigorous,, imprisonment for two years, and the other three petitioners to rigorous imprisonment for one year each.2. In appeal the learned Sessions Judge upheld the conviction under Section 304 of the petitioners Alef Sheikh and Abdul Rajak Sheikh and he set aside the conviction of Ismail Sheikh and Sabdu Sheikh under Section 301. He upheld the sentences of Alef and Abdul Rajak and reduced the sentence of Ismail and Sabdu to rigorous imprisonment for six months.3. This Rule was issued on two grounds, namely (1) that the Court of ...
Naresh Chandra Dutta Vs. Girish Chandra Das and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-22-1935
Reported in: AIR1936Cal17,160Ind.Cas.730
Mukerji, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff in a suit for pre-emption. It is not disputed that the Mahomedan law of pre-emption applies to the case though the parties themselves are Hindus. The following are the facts: The sale in connection with which the plaintiff is seeking to enforce his right to pre-empt is evidenced by a deed which was presented for registration at the registration office on the 30th day of August. Before that date the vendor, on receipt of Rs. 50 out of the total amount of consideration which was fixed at Rs. 500, had put the vendee in possession. On the date abovementioned the vendor admitted execution and thereupon the Sub-Registrar made the usual endorsements on the deed. The necessary entries and copies were thereafter made and the final endorsement that the deed had been registered was made on the 3rd day of September. The Munsif decreed the suit. On appeal by the defendants the Subordinate Judge reversed that decision and dismissed the suit, and his d...
Biswanath Rai Vs. Manik Sardar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-22-1935
Reported in: 168Ind.Cas.386
ORDERR.C. Mitter, J.1. The question involved in this Rule is whether the petitioner 'before me has the right to deposit the decretal amount with compensation under the provisions of either Section 174, Sub-Section (1) of the Bengal Tenancy Act or Order XXI, Rule 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure and thereby to set aside the Court sale.2. These facts are admitted. Four persons, namely, Biswanath Rai (petitioner), Santosh Tikadar, (now dead), father of opposite parties Nos. 3 and 4, Estambar Tikadar and Ghatak Chandra Tikadar (husbands of opposite parties Nos. 5 and 6 respectively) held some lands as under-ryots. Sixteen bighas out of these were held under them by Mauik Sardar (opposite party No. 1). Manik was accordingly an under-ryots of the second degree. Under Manik, Biswanath Rai (petitioner) is a tenant in. respect of 41 bighas of land. He is; therefore, ail under-ryot, of the third degree. In the locality' there is, no custom by which underryots can acquire occupancy rights. Biswa...
Ram Krishna Sen Gupta Vs. Haripur Co-operative Bank
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-21-1935
Reported in: 163Ind.Cas.591
S.K. Ghose, J.1. This Rule is directed against an order in a Small Cause Court matter passed by the Munsif of Ranaghat and it arises out of the following circumstances: The petitioner Ram Krishna Sen Gupta took a loan from the opposite party Haripur Cooperative Bank. His case is that the loan was for a sum of Rs. 180 and that the Secretary of the Bank fraudulently entered the amount as Rs. 250 on the bond. According to the petitioner the entire debt of Rs. 180 was satisfied by various payments ending on March 24, 1930. But three years after this date a further sum of Rs. 155-7-6 was demanded by the Bank on the ground that the bond was for the sum of Rs. 250. Thereupon under Rule 21 framed by the Government of Bengal under Section 43 of the Co-operative Credit Societies Act the matter was referred to the Assistant Registrar of the Co-operative Societies who again referred it to the arbitration of an Inspector of the Co-operative Societies. On May 26, 1933, the said arbitrators gave an a...
The Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs Vs. Raghu Lal Bra ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-21-1935
Reported in: 162Ind.Cas.943
Lort-Williams, J.1. This is an appeal by the Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs, Bengal, on behalf of the Government of Assam, against the order of the First Additional Sessions Judge of the Assam Valley Districts, dated May 15, 1934, setting aside the convictions of the respondents and the sentences passed thereupon, for offences under Sections 380 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code. The Sessions Judge did not go into the merits of the case but decided the appeal on a point of law. It is unnecessary, therefore, to go in detail into the facts. They are sufficiently stated in the appellate judgment.2. The case arose out of two thefts in two running trains, 29 Up and 30 Down, of the Assam Bengal Railway on the nights of August 17 and August 22,1933, and concerning two passengers, the owners, respectively, of two suit cases which, were stolen from their compartments on the two nights mentioned. Both the suit cases were found in the early morning of August 22, in the house of t...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »