Kolkata Court March 1936 Judgments
KamaruddIn Shah and ors. Vs. Sk. Diljan
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-31-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal57,166Ind.Cas.996
1. This appeal has arisen out of a suit for enforcement of a mortgage executed by defendant 1 and the father of defendants 2 and 3 in favour of the plaintiff and his father. The claim made in the suit was resisted by defendant 1, the purchaser of the mortgaged property; and the only question for consideration in this appeal is whether the plaintiff's claim in suit was barred by the provisions contained in 0. 2, Rule 2, Civil P.C. The question was decided in favour of the plaintiff by the Court of first instance; but the decision of the Court of appeal below was in favour of defendant 4, the appellant in that Court, and the plaintiff's suit was dismissed by the learned Judge in the lower appellate Court. This appeal is by the plaintiffs in the suit, and the only respondent in the appeal is defendant 4, the purchaser of the mortgaged property; the mortgagor defendants are not parties to the appeal to this Court.2. The mortgage bond on which the claim of the plaintiffs was based was execu...
Tag this Judgment!Annada Charan Dutta Vs. Kamala Sundari Rai and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-31-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal405,166Ind.Cas.892
1. The properties in suit belonged to one Umacharan Roy. He died leaving a will the material portion of which is as follows:I dedicate all my ancestral and self-acquired immoveable and moveable properties to my family deity Sree Sree Iswar Dayamayi Thakurani. For the present my wife, Srimati Kamala Sundari Thakurani and my son, Sriman Durga Prosad Roy shall go on managing the said properties. Out of the profits of the said properties the managers (Sarbarakars) shall maintain the deities, Sri Sri Iswar Dayamoyi, Sri Sri Iswar Dasabbhuja and all my usual annual festivities and the surplus profits shall be enjoyed in equal shares by my wife, the said Kamala Sundari Thakurani, and my sons Sriman Durga Prosad Roy and Kalika Prosad Roy and Sriman Karuna Kumar Roy, the minor son of my eldest son, the late Kishory Mohan Roy, and the manager (Sarbarakar) shall be bound in every way to bring up the minors Sriman Kalika Prosad Roy and Sriman Karuna Kumar Roy during their minority. Be it known tha...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of Dacca Vs. Gholam Kuddus Choudhury and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-31-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal688
1. These five appeals are under Section 15, Letters Patent, and have arisen out of proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act. In pursuance of a declaration, dated 17th December 1928, lands were acquired for a project named ' Landing Grounds for Aeroplanes at Dacca, in the village of Dhanmandal, Zillah Dacca.' The village is just outside the Municipal limits, and the lands acquired were near the other lands in the village purchased by private owners for residential purposes. The lands acquired had tenants on them, having rights of occupancy; their landlords had lakheraj right in the same. The Collector valued the tenants' interest in the lands acquired at Rs. 275 per bigha and the lakheraj right of the proprietors at twenty-five times the annual rent, and five years' purchase in addition for the loss of selami of the net annual profit for rent paid by the tenants to the proprietors; the total valuation of all interests in the lands acquired was about Rs. 450 per bigha. The tenants acce...
Tag this Judgment!Khitendra Nath Roy Chowdhary Vs. Madaneswar Chatterjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-30-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal297
Ameer Ali, J.1. This suit relates to a ticket taken in the sweepstake organized by the Royal Calcutta Turf Club Derby for the year 1934. The undisputed facts are as follows: The defendant Madaneswar Chatterjee, who was at all material times a clerk in the cash department of the Imperial Bank, applied for a ticket on 23rd May 1934, through his superior, the accountant of the Bank, Mr. Wright, giving as nom-de-plume 'Annapurna'. On 5th June 1934, a Tuesday, the draw was announced, and ticket No. 08090, the ticket which Mr. Wright obtained for Madaneswar Chatterjee, drew a horse called Bondsman, a non-starter. On 9th June 1934, Khitendra Nath Roy Chowdhury, the plaintiff, claimed that the ticket had been obtained for him, and that Rs. 10 had been paid to Madaneswar Chatterjee by his father for the purpose of applying for a ticket through Mr. Wright. On 15th June 1934 Mr. Wright stated in correspondence that he claimed no interest in the ticket or the prize, the ticket having been obtained...
Tag this Judgment!Nrisinga Chandra Nandy, in Re.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-29-1936
Reported in: [1936]4ITR428(Cal)
DERBYSHIRE, C.J. - This is a Reference to this Court made by the Income Tax Officer, Burdwan-Birbhum, arising out of the assessment made in the year 1932-33 upon Nrisingha Chandra Nandy Chowdhury as an individual on income from money-lending business carried on by him at Baidyapur in the Burdwan District, a rice mill at Boinchee in the Hooghly District, a business in stevedoring and dubashing in Calcutta, money-lending business carried on by him at Deoghar in the Sonthal Parganahs and his income from other sources. It is the stevedoring and dubashing business in Calcutta which gives rise to the question which is asked by the Commissioner. This stevedoring and dubashing business was carried on under the name of Chatterji & Co., and the question asked of this court is- what is the income properly assessable to income-tax of the assessee in respect of the business of Chatterji & Co. ?The assessee for some years previous to 1931 was the proprietor of this stevedoring and dubashing business...
Tag this Judgment!Secy. of State Vs. Kamala Ranjan Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-27-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal94
1. The plaintiff in the suits in which these appeals have arisen prayed for cancellation of certificates issued under the Public Demands Recovery Act, and for the recovery of the amounts realised from him by the Government. On the pleadings of the parties the question for consideration in the cases before the Court was, whether the plaintiff was liable for the costs of the settlement operations, and was the defendant, the Secretary of State for India in Council, legally entitled to recover the said costs from the plaintiff? The costs of settlement operations in a Mahal were apportioned between the Zamindar and the Putnidars under Section 114, Ben. Ten. Act, on assessment of the same after the termination of settlement, proceedings. The zamindary was purchased by the plaintiff at a sale for arrears of revenue, after certificates under the Public Demands Recovery Act had been issued for recovery of the expenses incurred in carrying out the settlement operations, so far as the share of th...
Tag this Judgment!Satish Chandra Basu Vs. Harendra Kumar Ghose
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-27-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal442,166Ind.Cas.443
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of arrears of rent. Plaintiffs claimed rent at the rate of Rs. 3 per kani on the basis of a lease of the year 1264 B.S. in respect of their 5 annas 3 gandas 1 kara and 1 krant share of the land demised. The defence of the tenants is that the plaintiffs are entitled to get rent at the rate of Rs. 2 per kani. The trial Judge overruled the defence and passed a decree for arrears of rent at the rate claimed by the plaintiffs. The defendants appealed to the lower appellate Court. The learned Additional District Judge has allowed the appeal in part. He has affirmed the rate decreed by the trial Judge in respect of 1 anna share but in respect of the remaining share he has reduced the rate to Rs. 2. Hence this second appeal by the plaintiffs. The defendants have also filed cross-objections.2. Mr. Gupta appearing on behalf of the plaintiffs appellants has raised two points in this appeal. The first contention is that the learned Additional Distri...
Tag this Judgment!Secretary of State Vs. Kamala Ranjan Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-27-1936
Reported in: 167Ind.Cas.741
1. The plaintiff in the suits in which these appeals have arisen prayed for cancellation of certificates issued under the Public Demands Recovery Act, and for the recovery of the amounts realised from him by the Government. On the pleadings of the parties the question for consideration in the cases before the Court was, whether the plaintiff was liable for the costs of the settlement operations, and was the defendant, the Secretary of State for India in Council, legally entitled to recover the said costs from the plaintiff The costs of settlement operations in a mahal were apportioned between the zemindar and the putnidars under Section 114, Bengal Tenancy Act, on assessment of the same after the termination of settlement proceedings. The zemindari was purchased by the plaintiff at a sale for arrears of revenue, after certificates under the Public Demands Recovery Act had been issued for recovery of the expenses incurred in carrying out the settlement operations, so far as the share of...
Tag this Judgment!Haranath Deb Nath and ors. Vs. Baishnab Charan Das and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-27-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal178,166Ind.Cas.552
1. This is an appeal from an order of remand, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, second Court, Sylhet. The plaintiffs-appellants in this Court, instituted a suit for enforcement of a mortgage bond executed by the defendants on 1st December 1930. The contesting defendant in the suit admitted the mortgage, but asserted in his defence that the mortgage had been satisfied by the payments made by the mortgagors. The issue raised in the case relevant for the purpose of the appeal was issue 2: Has the plaintiffs' claim in question been satisfied? The trial Court decided the question raised in that issue against the defendants, after refusing to admit in evidence a receipt mentioned in the written statement filed by defendant 1, and sought to be used in evidence in the case, on the ground that it was an unregistered document, and that its registration was compulsory under the law. The receipt was of the following description:On receiving Rs. 5,000 in cash in respect of your entir...
Tag this Judgment!Sm. Birajmohini Dassi Vs. Sm. Sarala Devi Chowdhurani
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-26-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal88
D.N. Mitter, J.1. Sarala Devi Chowdhurani, the respondent, commenced on 17th March 1930 the suit in which this appeal arises in the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge, 24 Parganas, for establishing her rights to the present possession of the house at 54 Ultadanga Main Road within the Municipal boundary of Calcutta. The suit purports to be one under the provisions of 0. 21, Rule 103, Civil P.C. That suit has been decreed by the Subordinate Judge. Hence the present appeal by the representative of the defendant to that suit, one Benode Behari Biswas, who died during the pendency of the suit.2. The allegation on which the plaintiff founds her title to the said premises, 54 Ultadanga Main Road, may be briefly stated thus: The property in question was originally held by Surendra Nath Dutt, Purendra Nath Dutt and Gokil Chandra Dutt who were members of the firm of P.N. Dutt and Company which at one time carried on an extensive business. The said Dutts mortgaged the property in question ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »