Kolkata Court May 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.
Jogesh Chandra Das and anr. Vs. Hem Chandra Ghose and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-21-1935
Reported in: AIR1936Cal243
Lodge, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for declaration of plaintiff's title to and recovery of Khas possession of the lande of a holding which originally stood in the name of one Hosanaddin. Hosan addin died 20 years ago leaving 2 sons, 3 daughters and a widow. The sons are defendants 3 and 4 in the suit. After the death of Hosanaddin the lands of the holding were in the actual occupation of defendants 3 and 4, the sons of Hosanaddin. These two defendants have transferred their interest in the holding to defendants 1 and 2 by two Kobalas dated Falgun 1329 and Pous 1332. The transferees are in actual occupation of the holding. The plaintiffs in the suit are the landlords. They seek khas possession on the ground that the holding has been abandoned by the original tenants. They made a second prayer for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from erecting permanent structures on the land. The Munsiff who tried the suit came to the conclusion that the holding had not been aba...
Bal Mukundo Singh Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-21-1935
Reported in: 165Ind.Cas.707
Lort-Williams, J.1. In this case the accused was tried in respect of unnatural offences alleged to have been committed upon three boys on three separate occasions. He was convicted by the Magistrate runder each of the charges. On appeal the convictions who regard to two of the boys were set aside, and the third conviction with regard to one Shib Nath Was upheld.2. The offence against Shib Nath was to have been committed on March 12. The accused used to occupy a couple of rooms on the ground floor of premises No. 7, Paddapukur Road. Shib Nath had occasion to visit some one else in these premises and as he was going past the room Occupied by the accused, he was invited to enter it. A friend of his was already in the room. The accused gave Shib Nath some pan and some intoxicating drink. Later on Shib Nath felt too intoxicated to leave and stayed there for the night after having his meal with the accused. They occupied Separate rooms, but in the night it is alleged that the accused came to...
Brindaban Chandra Mitra, Pleader, Judge's Court, Burdwan Vs. Atul Kris ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-21-1935
Reported in: 164Ind.Cas.728
R.C. Mitter, J.1. The petitioner, who was the common manager of the Kalna estate executed a promissory note in favour of the opposite party while he was the common manager. Since then he has passed his accounts and has been discharged by the District Judge, who appointed him. The promissory note which is dated September 18, 1931, is in these terms:I promise to pay on demand Babu Atul Krishna Bose or order the sum of Rs. 200 (two hundred) only with interest at the rate of 1-8 (Rupee one and annas eight) per cent. per mensem for value received in cash.2. He then signs the promissory note in the following manner:Brindaban Chandra Mitter Common Manager of Kalna.3. The suit out of which this Rule arises was instituted against him and a decree against him obliging him to pay personally has been passed by the lower Court. He raised the defence that he was not, liable, but the proprietors of the estate of which he was the common Manager were, as far their benefit the money was borrowed and app...
Satya Charan Srimani and ors. Vs. Ramkinkar Banerji and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-20-1935
Reported in: AIR1935Cal659,159Ind.Cas.1001
Guha, J.1. These two appeals have arisen out of a suit in which the plaintiff-respondent in this Court claimed Rs. 27,867-14-0 as the minimum royalty, cesses and price of coal, from the defendants' the suit, basing the claim on a kabuliat executed on 3rd June 1908(Ex. 11 in the case), evidencing a lease for 999 years of underground right in Chak Sitalpur in Lot Gopinathpur. The history of title of the plaintiff as lessor on which the claim in suit was founded, was given in detail in the plaint, and has been set out in the judgment of the trial Court against which these appeals are directed. It is not necessary for the purpose of these appeals to consider the materials relating to the accrual of the plaintiff's title as lessor, as indicated in the different documents filed in Court, entitling him to claim the amount sought to be realised by him in the suit. In the written statement filed by the contesting defendants the statements made by the plaintiff as to the devolution of interest a...
Bir Bikram Kishore Manikya Bahadur Vs. Khaliler Rahaman
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-17-1935
Reported in: AIR1935Cal664,159Ind.Cas.637
Henderson, J.1. This appeal is against an order rejecting an application filed by the appellant under the provisions of Section 47, Civil P.C. The appellant instituted a suit for ejectment against the respondent. He lost it and was made liable for costs. Why the appellant does not pay this petty sum and put an end to this matter, we cannot conceive. Be that as it may, he paid nothing and the respondent eventually took out execution. Two grounds have been taken, the first being that the application is barred by limitation and the second being that consent is necessary under Section 86, Civil P.C. Prima facie the application for execution was barred by limitation. The respondent attempted to save limitation by an allegation that a sum of Rs. 3 had been paid out of Court. This allegation has not been specifically investigated. A notice for which there is no provisions in the Code, was served on the appellant's agent. Then a notice under Order 21, Rule 22 was issued on 1st March 1932. The ...
Sm. Sudhamoyee Basu and anr. Vs. Bhujendra Nath Biswas and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-17-1935
Reported in: AIR1935Cal713,159Ind.Cas.370
Nasim Ali, J.1. This is an appeal by the decree-holders against an appellate order of the District Judge of Burdwan dated 19th February 1934 in a proceeding under Section 47, Civil P.C. The appellants obtained a decree in the first Munsif's Court at Krishnagar (Nadia) on 1st February 1932 for Rs. 1,636-10-11 against three ladies, Jagmay a, Padmabati and Bhababhabini for arrears of rent of a tenure inherited by them from their father which accrued after the death of their father. On 6th February 1932 Jagmaya died and on 5th May of the same year Padmabati died. On 22nd June 1932 the sole surviving daughter Bhababhabini surrendered her life interest in the estate left by her father by a deed of surrender in favour of the reversioners. Simultaneously with this deed of surrender, a deed of family arrangement and partition was executed between the reversioners by which the properties surrendered by Bhababhabini were partitioned between them. It appears from the deed of partition that the res...
Gobinda Ramanuj Das Mohanta and anr. Vs. Mohunt Ram Charan Ramanuj Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-17-1935
Reported in: 164Ind.Cas.33
1. Many of the facts which transpire in this case were before the Judicial Committee in a case Ram Charan Ramanuj Das v. Gobinda Ramanuj Das 56 IA 104 : 114 Ind. Cas. 571 : AIR 1929 PC 65 : 33 CWN 346 : 29 LW 428 : 49 CLJ 321 : 31 Bom. LR 715 : (1929) ALJ 414 : 56 MLJ 636 : (1929) MWN 427 (PC), and their Lordships' appreciation of them is very useful for the decision of this case.2. In the town of Chandrakona in the District of Midnapore, located in the Nayagunj quarter of the town, there is a famous Math of the Ramanuj soot of Baishnavas. The earliest that is known of this religious and charitable foundation is that in 1810 when one Lachman Ramanuj Das was the Mahant of this institution, having succeeded one Mahant Gopaldas in that office, and when one of the deities installed there was the idol Sree Sree Gopinath Jiu, one Nitai Singh made a gift by a document addressed to him as 'To the highly respected Sreejut Lachman Ramanujdas Mahant Maharaj Goswamiji.' The document was dated Magh...
Ram Krishna Prodhan Vs. Sm. Kousalya Mani Dasi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-1935
Reported in: AIR1935Cal689
D.N. Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal by defendant 1 and arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs who are the daughters of Bhagabat to whom the properties in suit belonged, for declaration of title to the half-share of the plaint properties, to a decree for recovery of possession after such declaration for partition of the properties by metes and bounds and for costs. The suit has been partially decreed by the Subordinate Judge and a preliminary decree for partition has been passed. Hence the appeal by defendant 1. A genealogical table has been appended to the plaint (see p. 8, part I of the paper-book) and shows the relationship between the parties to the suit: MADHAB PRODHAN (deceased) ______________________|_______________________ | | Bhagabat (deceased) Khetra Mohan (deceased) | ____________|____________ | | | | Gobind Prodhan Ram Krishna Prodhan | defendant 2. defendant 1. |______________________ ____________________|___________________ | | | First wife Second wife Third wife ...
Raj Nandini Debi and ors. Vs. Bhusan Chandra Sar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-1935
Reported in: AIR1936Cal234
Nasim Ali, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs in a suit for ejectment of the defendants under Section 25 and Section 155, Ben. Ten. Act. One of the defences to the action was that the defendants were not occupancy raiyats but raiyats holding at fixed rate. The trial Court accepted this defence and dismissed the suit. On appeal the learned Judge has found that the defendants are occupancy raiyats, but the Judge dismissed the suit on the ground that it was barred by limitation under Article 32, Lim. Act, Hence the present appeal by the plaintiffs.2. The Advocate for the appellants contends that the view taken by the learned Judge on the question of limitation is wrong, inasmuch as Ex. 7 would go to show that the 'misuse' took place within two years before the institution of the suit. It is not necessary to express any opinion on this question inasmuch as it appears to me that the learned Judge's finding on the question of the status of the defendants is wrong. The Judge has held th...
Ram Krishna Prodhan Vs. Srimati Kousalya Manidasi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-1935
Reported in: 158Ind.Cas.925
D.N. Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal by defendant No. 1 and arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs who are the daughters of Bhagabat to whom the properties in suit belonged, for declaration of title to the half share of the properties, to a decree for recovery of possession after such declaration for partition of the properties by metes and bounds and for costs. The suit has been partially decreed by the Subordinate Judge and a preliminary decree for partition has been passed. Hence the appeal by defendant No. 1. A genealogical table has been appended to the plaint (see p. 8, part I of the paper-book) and shows the relationship between the parties to the suit: MADHAB PRODHAN (deceased). _____________________________|____________________ | |Bhagabat (deceased) Khetra Mohan (deceased) | _____________|_______ | | | | Gobind Prodhan, Ram Krishna | defendant, No. 2. Prodhan, defend- |____________________ ant No 1. ____________|_____________________ | | | First wife Second wife Third ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »