Kolkata Court December 1936 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.
H.A. Harle Vs. N.H. Harle
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-09-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal303
ORDERAmber Ali, J.1. This petition is the husband's petition. There was jurisdiction to file it in the District Court of Burdwan. It has been filed there. Under Section 8, Divorce Act, there is power to transfer it to this Court. Mr. Banerjee, on behalf of the wife (the respondent) has applied for such transfer. There is everything in favour of the transfer. The parties are both working in Calcutta. The respondent is employed in Calcutta in an office, and Mr. Banerjee tells me that she will have the greatest difficulty in going elsewhere; in fact, he went so far as to say that she would lose her employment if she has to go to Burdwan. I hope that is not the case. But the case would be more conveniently tried in Calcutta, and I should have had no hesitation in ordering a transfer except for the consideration I am about to mention. It is one of expenses. When I was at the Bar, I remember Judges saying that the matter of expanse and costs was not for them. I do not agree. More than half t...
Sarat Chunder Mullick Vs. Administrator General of Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-09-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal382
ORDERAmeer Ali, J.1. This is an application in a suit of 1876 which suit substantially was to decide upon the effect of certain provisions in the will made by a lady called Chitra Dasi for the endowment of a deity. The matter can only be understood by a reference to the genealogical table annexed to the affidavit of Monilal Mullick, dated 20th November 1936. There was a judgment and a decree in that suit, and a final decree after inquiry by an officer deciding that the persons entitled to act as shebaits or to worship were the five sons of Chitra Dasi and their heirs. All that took place a long time ago and the original parties to that suit are long since dead. From time to time however their descendants were substituted and at the time of his death in October 1936 one Sarat, the grandson of Chitra Dasi's fourth son, was the plaintiff having got there presumably by an order for substitution such as is sought on this application. This application is by Moni for whom Mr. Page has appeare...
Sm. Brojeswari Dassi Vs. Monoranjan Dutta and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-09-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal167
M.C. Ghose, J.1. This is an appeal by defendant 2 in a suit for a declaration that the deed of surrender by a widow of her husband's estate is void and inoperative. The trial Court held that the deed of surrender was valid and disposed of the suit. In appeal, the learned District Judge has held that the deed of surrender was invalid and has decreed the suit. The facts which are not in dispute are that the properties belonged to one Gopal who died leaving two sons Ananta and Benode and two or more daughters. The property was inherited in half share by Ananta and half share by Benode. Ananta died leaving a son Mohendra who inherited his half share. Benode died leaving a widow Kusum Kamini who inherited her husband's half share as her life estate. The plaintiff is a son of one of the daughters of Gopal. In 1926, the widow Kusum Kamini executed the deed of surrender in question in favour of Mohendra. In the deed she stated that she was surrendering to Mohendra, who was the next reversionar...
Hari Pada Moitra Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-08-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal234
Cunliffe, J.1. The petitioner here was convicted under Section 69, Provincial Insolvency Act, for concealing some of his assets in the schedule filed in his insolvency. He was sentenced to three months' rigorous imprisonment and the conviction and sentence were upheld by the learned Sessions Judge who heard the appeal in the lower Court.2. The history of this man's commercial business is rather curious. Apparently he was in the habit of making deposits with a local bank known as the Berhampore Bank, one of whose directors was a person who did a loan business under the appellation of Berhampore Bank. At one time he had Rs. 7,500 in the bank and that was some twelve years ago. He, to suit his own purposes, withdrew a part of this deposit and made a re-deposit in the name of his wife. She was called Usha Bala Debi. He then went on operating on the account. For example, we find him negotiating a loan with the bank of Rs. 2,000 and making a reference to this sum of money which stood in his ...
In Re: the Indian Companies Act, Vii of 1913;
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-08-1936
Reported in: 169Ind.Cas.506
Williams, J.1. On this petition it is agreed that no question of prerogatives arises, and the short point, raised is, whether the priority of payment of all debts due to the Crown which prevails in insolvency by reason of Section 49 of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, obtains equally in the winding up of a company in liquidation, by reason of the provisions of Section 229 of the Indian Companies Act or whether only those Crown debts have priority in winding-up proceedings which are specifically mentioned in Section 230 of the Companies Act.2. Section 229, provides that:In the winding-up of an Insolvent Company the same rules shall prevail and be observed with regard to the respective rights of secured and unsecured creditors and to debts provable and to the valuation of annuities and future and contingent liabilities as are in force for the time under being the law of insolvency with respect to the estates of persons adjudged insolvent; and all persons who in any such case would be...
Abheswari Dasya and anr. Vs. Baburali Shaikh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-07-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal191
B.K. Mukherji, J.1. This is a rule granted on an application under Section 25, Provincial Small Cause Courts Act. The petitioner is the plaintiff and the suit was for recovery of money due on a promissory note which was executed by one Babur Ali Shaikh, the predecessor of the present defendants. The promissory note was for Rs. 100 only and was executed on 6th May 1924. Baburali died in March 1930 leaving behind him as his heirs his widow who was defendant 1 in the suit and three infant sons who are defendants 2 to 4. The suit was instituted after three years from the date of the hand-note and the plaintiff seeks to get round the plea of limitation by proof of payment of interest amounting to Rs. 10 made by defendant 1 on 16th October 1931. The suit is admittedly within three years from that date. The trial Court found that the payment would extend the period of limitation against defendant 1 who made the payment but not against the other defendants and in this view of the case it passe...
Radhika Nath Biswas Vs. Midnapore Zemindari Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-07-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal292
S.K. Ghose, J.1. This is an application for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council and it arises out of a suit brought by the present petitioner against the respondent to England for declaration of his title to certain lands and recovery of possession thereof and also for mesne profits. The suit was decreed with coats and mesne profits by the Additional Subordinate Judge of Nadia. Against that decision the respondent to England preferred a first appeal to this Court. By their judgment dated 3rd July 1936 Mukerji and Jack, JJ., allowed the appeal and dismissed the petitioner's suit. Against that judgment the petitioner has asked for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council. The only point that arises to show the competency of the appeal is whether it satisfies the condition as to valuation as laid down in para. 1 of Section 110, Civil P.C. Now in the plaint para. 7, the plaintiff states that he for the present claims Rs: 400 as approximately due on account of mesne profits. Para. 8 ...
Akhil Bandhu Guha and ors. Vs. Srimati Suradhani Debya Chaudhurani and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-04-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal446
S.K. Ghose, J.1. These two appeals arise out of a judgment and decree in a suit upon a mortgage which was brought under the following circumstances: Defendant 1 is the proprietor of an estate, defendant 2 who died pending the hearing of the suit, defendant 1 being substituted in her place, was the widow of defendant 1's grandfather. Defendant 1 on attaining majority executed a deed of trust in favour of defendant 2 for the management of the estate. From 1914 onwards, defendants 1 and 2 together executed eight mortgage bonds as follows: Between 1914 and 1917 they executed four mortgage bonds in favour of the Maharaja of Mymensingh. On 18th March 1918 they executed the fifth mortgage bond, viz., in favour of the predecessors of defendants 3 to 6 (vide Ex. S) in respect of properties which are mentioned in para. 4 of the plaint. By this bond defendants 3 to 6 were subrogated to the first mortgage in favour of the Maharaja. On 18th August 1918 the sixth mortgage bond which was in favour of...
Sasi Kumar Majumdar Vs. Golap Banu and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-03-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal669,173Ind.Cas.590
B.K. Mukherjea, J.1. This appeal raises a short and an interesting point of law. The plaintiff's case is that the lands in suit were comprised in four raiyati holdings which belonged to one Lal Mia. The immediate landlord was one Ajijulla Munshi who was the proprietor of the estate within which these lands were situate. On 15th July 1918, Lal Mia got a sikmi taluki right under the proprietor by a patta which was granted by Ajijulla and he became thereby the landlord in respect of the four raiyati holdings held by him. The sikmi taluk was sold at a sale under Regulation 8 of 1819 on 16th May 1931 and the purchaser was the plaintiff. The suit has now been commenced by the plaintiff for recovery of possession of the lands in suit on the ground that he being a purchaser at a sale under Regulation 8 of 1819 and having annulled all incumbrances, Lal Mia had no right to remain in possession.2. The trial Court decreed the suit in part. It gave the plaintiff a decree with regard to the lands wh...
Commissioner of Wakfs Vs. Munshi Abbas Ali and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-01-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal150
B.K. Mukherji, J.1. This rule was issued sat the instance of the Commissioner of Wakfs, Bengal, and is directed against an order of the Additional District Judge of Howrah dated 4th May 1936 by which it was held that the petitioner had no right either to appear in a suit relating to certain wakf estate pending before the Judge or to appoint an ad interim mutawalli till a mutawalli was appointed by the Court. The short facts giving rise to this dispute may be stated as follows: One Jitan Bibi created a wakf of certain properties situated in the District of Howrah by a document dated 10th December 1893. In the year 1924, certain persons who are opposite parties Nos. 1 to 6 in this rule instituted a suit against the defendants in the Court of the Additional District Judge, Howrah, under Section 92, Civil P.C., praying inter alia for removal of the existing mutawallis, for the settlement of a scheme for accounts and other reliefs. There was a decree passed by the learned Judge in July 1932...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »