Kolkata Court July 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.
Emperor Vs. Tarak Nath Baidya and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1935
Reported in: AIR1935Cal687,159Ind.Cas.149
Lort-Williams, J.1. This is a Reference under Section 307, Criminal P.C., The accused Tarak was charged under Section 471 and the other accused under Section 467 read with Section 109, I.P.C. The case was heard by a jury of 5 persons who brought in a unanimous verdict of 'not guilty' on all the charges against all the accused. The evidence given was circumstantial. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge considered it so convincing and clear that he regarded it as essential for the ends o justice to refer the case to this Court on the ground that the verdict of the jury was wrong and perverse and against the weight of evidence.2. The case for the prosecution was that Akshoy and Gobardhan held a plot of land tinder one Hrishikesh. Hrishikesh sold his interest to the accused Tarak and to one Surendra in equal moieties. Surendra brought his 8 annas share in the name of his minor son Krishto. Akshoy and Gobardhan then took a lease of the land for five years from Tarak and Krishto and executed...
Annada Prosad Bhadra and ors. Vs. Gopal Chandra Ghose and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1935
Reported in: AIR1935Cal725,159Ind.Cas.462
1. The question raised in this appeal by the plaintiffs in the suit out of which it has arisen, is whether the decision in a previous suit instituted by the plaintiffs, in the year 1925, for enhancement of rent under Section 30(b), Ben. Ten. Act, operated as a bar to the question whether the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act were applicable to the tenancy in suit, being agitated in the present litigation. In the previous suit of the year 1925, on the objection raised by the defendants, it was decided that the tenancy in question was not for agricultural purposes, and the provision of the Bengal Tenancy Act could not therefore apply. The claim for enhancement of rent made in the suit was defeated on the aforesaid decision given by the Munsif in that suit, on 11th November 1925. But for the reason given by the Munsif that the provision of the Bengal Tenancy Act had no application, the decision dismissing the claim for enhancement of rent was not sustainable; no other ground havi...
Chairman of Commissioners of the Baruipore Municipality Vs. Sivadas Ro ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1935
Reported in: AIR1935Cal726,159Ind.Cas.542
Henderson, J.1. This appeal is by the defendant who is the Chairman of the Baruipore Municipality. The plaintiffs instituted the suit in order to obtain a declaration that a certain assessment was illegal. In order to understand the first argument made on behalf of the appellant it is necessary to note that the commissioners of the Municipality were superseded and the Circle Officer was appointed under the provisions of Section 66(b), Bengal Municipal Act, to perform the duties of the commissioners. It was contended on behalf of the Chairman that the suit should have been dismissed because no notice was served on the Circle Officer under the provisions of Section 80, Civil P.C. Neither the Munsif nor the Subordinate Judge came to any definite conclusions on this point, but it has been argued before me on both sides, and I am clearly of opinion that no notice was necessary. It is quite clear that if a public officer is appointed Chairman of a Municipality it is not necessary to serve no...
Bibhuti Bhusan Dutta and anr. Vs. Uday Chand Mahatap
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1935
Reported in: AIR1935Cal766
M C. Ghose J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff zamindar in a suit for rent against the defendant patnidar in respect of certain resumed chowkidari chakran land. The only point at issue is what is the rate of rent payable by the defendant to the plaintiff. The patni was created in 1847. In 1899 the land of which the rent is now in dispute was resumed by Government as chowkidari chakran land and assessed to land revenue. Thereafter in 1905 the then patnidar Anath Bandhu Banerjee took settlement of the resumed land from the plaintiff agreeing to pay the revenue assessed by the Government and also a half of that amount as profit to the zamindar. The revenue assessed by the Government was Rs. 25-7-0. According to the kabuliyat of 1905 the plaintiff claimed that the defendant is liable to pay rent at the rate of Rs. 38-2-6. The defendant who purchased the patni in 1916 at an auction sale under Regn. 8 of 1819 pleaded that the greater part of the land which was resumed as chowkidari chakr...
Phani Bhusan Sen Vs. Sanat Kumar Maitra and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1935
Reported in: AIR1935Cal773
ORDERR.C. Mitter, J.1. The petitioner and opposite parties 1 and 2 stood as candidates for election as commissioners from Ward No. 5 of the Rajshahi Municipality. The election was held on 28th March 1934 and the petitioner was declared elected. He filed his nomination paper on 26th February 1934. It was scrutinised by the Chairman on 3rd March 1934 and was found to be in order. At that time an objection was raised to the effect that ha was not eligible for election on the ground that he had been convicted about two years ago under Section 420, I.P.C., and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 500, and detention till the rising of the Court. However the certified copy of the judgment of the Magistrate was not produced at the time with the result that the Chairman held that his nomination paper was in order. Against the action of the Chairman a petition was filed before the District Magistrate of Rajshahi, but the latter refused to enter into the merits of the petition, throwing it out on the groun...
Abdul Rahman Mullick and ors. Vs. Azahar All Khan
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1935
Reported in: AIR1935Cal733
R.C. Mitter, J.1. The plaintiffs who are mutawallis of a wakf created by one Kader Bux in Aswin 1316, have sued the defendant for arrears of rent and also for enhancement of rent under the provisions of Section 30(b), Ben. Ten. Act. The claim for arrears of rent has not been resisted, the defendants only contesting their right to enhance rent. Shortly after creating the wakf by which Kader Bux appointed himself mutawalli, he granted in favour of the defendant a mukarari mourasi lease by a registered document in the month of Magh 1316. It is this lease that has been put up by the defendant against the plaintiff's claim for enhancement. It is not disputed that the plaintiffs have become mutawallis on the death of Kader Bux. The question is whether the lease is binding on the plaintiffs, a question which is complicated by the proceedings of an earlier suit inter partes.2. That suit was a suit instituted by the plaintiffs against the defendant for khas possession. It was instituted in 1929...
Mahammed HossaIn and ors. Vs. Bholanath Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1935
Reported in: AIR1936Cal224
Jack, J.1. This was a Rule calling upon the District Magistrate of Birbhum and upon Bholanath Das, the complainant opposite party to show cause why proceeding under Sub-section 497 and 498, I. P. C., should not be quashed, or, in the alternative, the case should not be transferred from the Court of Mr. I yengar to the Court of some Magistrate outside Rampurhat. Two of the petitioners were originally tried for kidnapping under Section 366 and were acquitted on appeal to the Court, on the grounds that the girl in question went of her own accord to the house of the accused and that there was no taking or sending. After the acquittal on appeal in that case, this prosecution has been launched against two persons Mahammed Hossain and Bulu Khan along with four other persons apparently on the same facts.2. The ground upon which this application was made is that these proceedings are an abuse of the process of the Court, inasmuch as on the final finding in the appeal in this case, the facts on ...
Abdul Rahman Mullik and ors. Vs. Azahar Ali Khan
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1935
Reported in: 159Ind.Cas.1116
R.C. Mitter, J.1. The plaintiffs who are mutawallis of a wakf created by one Kader Bux in Aswin 1316, have sued the defendant for arrears of rent and also for enhancement of rent under the provisions of Section 30(b), Bengal Tenancy Act. The claim for arrears of rent has not been resisted, the defendants only contesting their right to enhance rent. Shortly after creating the wakf by which Kader Bux appointed himself mutawalli, he granted in favour of the defendant a mukarari mourasi lease by a registered document in the month of Magh 1316. It is this lease that has been put up by the defendant against the, plaintiff's claim for enhancement. It is not disputed that the plaintiffs have become mutawallis on the death of Kader Bux. The question is whet her the lease is binding on the plaintiffs, a question which is complicated by the proceedings of an earlier suit inter parties.2. That suit was a suit instituted by the plaintiffs against the defendant for khas possession. It was instituted...
Muhammad HossaIn and ors. Vs. Bholanath Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1935
Reported in: 162Ind.Cas.176
Jack, J.1. This was a Rule calling upon the District Magistrate of Birbhum and upon Bholanath Das, the complainant opposite party to show cause why proceedings under Sections 497 and 498 of the Indian Penal Code should not be quashed or, in the alternative, the case should not be transferred from the Court of Mr. Iyengar to the Court of some Magistrate outside Rampurhat. Two of the petitioners were originally tried for kidnapping under Section 366 and were acquitted on appeal to this Court on the grounds that the girl in question went of her own accord to the house of the accused and that there was no taking or sending. After the acquittal on appeal in that case this prosecution has been launched against two persons Muhammad Hossain and Bulu Khan along with four other persons apparently on the same facts.2. The ground upon which this application was made is that these proceedings are an abuse of the process of the Court, inasmuch as on the final finding in the appeal in this case, the ...
Sasi Kanta Acharjee Choudhury Vs. Rajendra Kumar Chakravarty and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-19-1935
Reported in: AIR1935Cal729,159Ind.Cas.681
Nasim Ali, J.1. Estate No. 2 of the Mymensingh Collectorate was partitioned by the partition Deputy Collector into separate estates on 24th February 1926. We are informed that the partition proceedings are still pending in appeal before the Collector. By the order of the partition Deputy Collector under Section 57, Estates Partition Act, the plaintiffs in the suit out of which this appeal arises, in their share got Rupees 38-1-0 as assets out of a Mouza called Daribhabakhali. The Deputy Collector partitioned the estate on the footing that the estate was not divided by private arrangement formally agreed to by all the proprietors and that the proprietors were not in possession of separate lands representing their interest in the estate. On 7th September 1928, plaintiffs commenced the present suit in the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Mymensingh for a declaration that the interest in the parent estate is the proprietary right over certain specific lands only in one Mouza, viz,, Mouza ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »