Kolkata Court August 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.
Secy. of State Vs. Brajendra Kishore Rai Choudhury and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-1935
Reported in: AIR1936Cal629
D.N. Mitter, J.1. The suit in which these two appeals arise was brought by the plaintiff, now respondent, for several reliefs, viz: (ka) for declaration of plaintiffs' mourashi maliki right by settlement and by right of adverse possession for upwards of 12 years to 1/3 share of the two beels (fisheries) known as Dhola and Baruri beels described more fully in the schedule to the plaint and of the Chapras, Nalas, khals and Kuris attached thereto; (kha) for a declaration that according to the provisions of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation of 1886 the plaintiff is entitled after the expiry of the period of the settlement of 1902 to get fresh settlement at a proper Jama of lands described in the schedule and of the two said beels from Government; (ga) for a declaration that the Government has no right to separate the lands of the beels, Baruri and Dhola, from the other lands of pattas Nos. 82 and 129 to assess any rent therefor separately in an arbitrary manner or upon the produce; (gh...
Hem Chandra Das Chaudhury and ors. Vs. Secy. of State and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-24-1935
Reported in: AIR1935Cal296,155Ind.Cas.1055
1. This appeal asises out of a suit which was instituted by the plaintiffs for a declaration that the assessment of cess by the Cess Revaluation Officer on the income from the stalls of a certain market or hat of which the plaintiffs are tenure-holders was illegal and ultra vires, and also for refund of the amount of cess which they had paid under protest. The Courts below have dismissed the suit.2. The plaintiffs are tenure-holders in respect of the lands on which the market or hat holds its sittings. The exact particulars are not available, but, as far as may be gathered, there are some stalls and also some open space on which the dealers come and sit and do their work. The hat meets two days in the week, The plaintiffs have taken kabuliyats from several ijardars who under the terms thereof collect tolls from the stall keepers and dealers of various descriptions and out of the sums so collected pay certain sums as jamas per year to the plaintiffs. The jamas just mentioned have been t...
Bhabani Prosanna Lahiri and anr. Vs. Manindra Chandra Roy Choudhury an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-23-1935
Reported in: AIR1935Cal760,159Ind.Cas.752
Nasim Ali,1. Appeal arises out of a suit for possession of a plot of land marked A in the Commissioner's map on declaration of plaintiffs' zamindary right there to Plaintiffs' case is that the disputed land is a part of the mal lands of the village Kamal Kachhna of which they are the proprietors, that they were all along in possession of the same till they were dispossessed therefrom by an order of the criminal Court, under Section 145, Criminal P.C. The defence of defendants 1 and 2 is that the disputed land is rent free and that it was never in the possession of the plaintiffs or their predecessors. They also claim title by adverse possession for more than 12 years. The trial Judge held that though the disputed land was mal land of Kamal Kachhna, the defendants had a title of legal origin the exact nature of which was lost in antiquity. In this view the learned Judge did not consider it necessary to come to any finding on the question of adverse possession set up by the defendants. H...
Ramprosad Surajmull Vs. Motilal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-22-1935
Reported in: AIR1936Cal53
Costello, J.1. This is an appeal against two orders made by Panckridge; J., one on 23rd January 1934 and the second on 14th December 1934. The latter order was made as the result of an application on behalf of the plaintiffs in the suit to set aside a previous order which had been made by the learned Judge, purporting to act under Rule 8, Chapter 26, Reference Rules, of this Court whereby the plaintiffs' suit was dismissed for want of prosecution. An examination of the history of the litigation between the parties demonstrates very clearly that neither the plaintiffs nor the defendant have any merits in the matter. The suit was instituted as long ago as 13th December 1918 for the recovery of the sum of Rs. 12,665-11-9 alleged to be due on a mutual, open and current account. The written statement was filed on 14th February 1919 and the defence taken by the defendant was to this effect: the current account referred to in the plaint was admitted but defendant claimed to be entitled to cre...
Kanhyalal Bhargava and ors. Vs. Banwari Lal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-22-1935
Reported in: AIR1936Cal269,166Ind.Cas.657
ORDERMcNair, J.1. This is an application for adjudication as insolvents of 19 members of a joint Mitakshara Hindu family who are alleged to be carrying on business under the firm name of Kishorelal Mukundlal at various addresses in Calcutta. That firm is alleged to be indebted to the petitioners in a sum of about rupees 75,000 on Khatapeta account. The petitioners were three members of a Mitakshara family trading as Radha Kisen Beniprasad at 10 Cotton Street, Calcutta. Kanhyalal is said to be the Karta of the family, Manoharlal is his brother and Baikuntha is the infant son of Kanhyalal who acts as his next friend. The petition was presented on 18th April 1935 and was ordered to be served on the debtors, the hearing being fixed for 21st May. The third petitioner Manoharlal died on 2nd May and his interest devolved on his brother Kanhyalal. Owing to Manohar's death the hearing was adjourned to 18th June and has since been adjourned on various occasions by consent. On 24th January 1935, ...
Daulatram Rawatmull Vs. Maharajlal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-1935
Reported in: AIR1936Cal219
Panckridge, J.1. This is an application on behalf of some of the defendants to revoke the leave given under C l. 12 of the Charter to institute this suit, and to take the plaint off the file. The suit is on a promissory note and the sum claimed amounts to Rs. 11,684. The plaintiffs are described as a firm carrying on business in Calcutta. The defendants, who are 17 in number, are described as being landholders, residing at a village in the district of Mongyr. I take these descriptions from the cause title. In the body of the plaint the defendants are further described as members of a joint Hindu Mitakshara family. The plaintiffs' case is that certain of the defendants as kurtas and managers of the joint family borrowed moneys and purchased piece-goods and other commodities from one Ramcoomar Marwari. These accounts between the kurtas and Ramcoomar were adjusted from time to time and promissory notes were given and renewed. The last of such promissory notes is said to have been executed...
Sheikh Alam and ors. Vs. Atul Chandra Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-1935
Reported in: AIR1936Cal299,163Ind.Cas.84
Nasim Ali, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for possession. The trial Court decreed the suit. On appeal the learned Judge has affirmed the finding of the trial Court on the question of plaintiffs' title. He has, however, dismissed the suit on the ground that it is barred by limitation under Article 3, Schedule 3, Ben. Ten. Act. Hence this second appeal by the plaintiffs.2. The only point for determination in this appeal is whether the suit is barred by special limitation. The facts which are material in this connection are these:3. The disputed lands appertain to the occupancy holding of one Meajan under defendants 1 to 5 and some other persons. Meajan died leaving behind a widow Jokarjan, a son Tukani and three daughters Matijan, Rabjan and Mamjan. Plaintiffs 1 to 5 and 9 to 13 claim title to the disputed lands on the basis of certain usufructuary mortgages executed by Meajan and after his death by Tukani. The other plaintiffs are Rabjan, Mamjan and the husband of the deceased Ma...
SachIn Das Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-1935
Reported in: AIR1936Cal524
1. The appellant Sachin Das was charged with having committed an offence under Section 124-A, I. P. C., and on being tried for the same, by the learned Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta, was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year. The charge against the appellant was that he by delivering a speech under the auspices of the Unemployed Council, Calcutta, brought or attempted to bring into hatred or contempt or excited or attempted to excite disaffection towards Government established by law in British India. The defence of the accused placed on his trial before the Magistrate was that he had no intention whatsoever of preaching sedition, and that his only object was to express his views regarding the unemployment problem and to explain the various efforts made in different countries to tackle it. The question to be decided in the case was whether upon the speech taken as a whole, it could be held that it attracted the provisions contained in Section 124-A, I. P. C. As has be...
Bhupati Mohan Das Vs. Phanindra Chandra Chakravarty and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-19-1935
Reported in: AIR1935Cal756
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for a declaration that the plaintiff is the assignee from defendant 2 of a sum of money specified in the schedule attached to the plaint and as such is entitled to get the said sum from defendant 1 who realised the same in execution of a decree obtained by him against defendant 2. The plaintiff's case briefly stated is as follows:2. Defendant 2, formerly a reader of English literature of the Dacca University, borrowed Rs. 4,200 on a hand-note from the plaintiff on 11th April 1926. On the same day by way of collateral security he assigned to the plaintiff his right, title and interest in his 20 years endowment policy No. 533114 for Rupees 5,000 with the Sun Life Assurance of Canada and in the provident fund money under the University of Dacca accrued and to be accrued thereafter until the debt on the hand-note would be fully liquidated. Under Clause 2, Section 2, Dacca University Act, the Governor-General in Council extended the provisions of the Prov...
In Re: N., a Pleader
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-19-1935
Reported in: AIR1935Cal742,159Ind.Cas.664
ORDER1. The rule in this case was issued by the full Court under Section 12, Legal Practitioners Act (18 of 1879), calling upon N, a pleader practising at Sylhet, to show cause why he should not be suspended or dismissed on the ground that he had been convicted of offences implying a defect of character which unfits him to be a pleader. The pleader has not thought it fit to appear before us and show cause, in spite of notice served on him.2. From the materials before us, it appears that the pleader was convicted thrice in connection with the last Civil Disobedience Movement. It Appears further that in one of the proceedings before the criminal Court, he stated before the Magistrate that had an Englishman sat in judgment over him, he would have made a statement; but that it was not only useless, but it was also painful to make a statement when one of his countrymen sat in judgment over him in connection with his activities in making his country free from foreign bondage. In another crim...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »