Kolkata Court April 1936 Judgments
Arjun Das Kundu Vs. Marchia Telini
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal434,166Ind.Cas.886
R.C. Mitter, J.1. The respondent before me applied under Section 10, Provincial Insolvency Act for being adjudicated as an insolvent. She said in her application that her assets were almost nil. She mentioned the names of her creditors, the appellant being one of them. The application was dated 1st September 1930 and the adjudication order was passed on 25th August 1931, by which the insolvent was directed to apply for discharge within six months of the said order. As there were no appreciable assets, the Court did not appoint a Receiver on her adjudication. In the application she gave an information that she had instituted a suit for some land against her husband and if she won that suit, her assets could be used for the purpose of meeting the creditors, but she had no present means for satisfying her creditors. The present appellant, although his name was given in the application as a creditor, did not take any steps to prove his debt before the discharge of his insolvent. The insolv...
Tag this Judgment!Kali Kumar Mitter Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-29-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal413
Cunliffe, J.1. A preliminary objection which we consider to be well founded is taken by the Crown here against the competence of this appeal. It is preferred by one Kali Kumar Mitter against a sentence of six months' rigorous imprisonment passed on him by one of the Presidency Magistrates for an offence of conspiracy to cheat, under Sections 420 and 120-B of the Code read together. The right of appeal in criminal matters is a statutory one, and is primarily governed by that first Section 404 which forms the commencement of Ch. 31, Criminal P.C., which is headed, 'Of Appeal, Reference and Revision'. Section 404 is in these terms:No appeal shall lie from any judgment or order of a criminal Court except as provided for by this Code or by any other law for the time being in force.2.Turning further on in the chapter, we come to Section 411, the section appropriate to this particular conviction. Section 411 is in these terms:Any person convicted on a trial held by a Presidency Magistrate may...
Tag this Judgment!Hari Charan Banerjee and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-29-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal355,163Ind.Cas.152
ORDERJack, J.1. This Rule was issued on the Chief Presidency Magistrate to show cause why an order convicting the petitioners under Section 45, Act 4 of 1866 (Calcutta Police Act), and sentencing them to pay a fine of Rs. 100 each, should not be set aside on the ground that there was no evidence to show that gaming was taking place at the time the accused were prosecuted, and also on the ground that there was no evidence to show that the premises where the gaming is alleged to have been taking place was a common gaming house within the meaning of Section 3 of the Act. The evidence is that a Sub-Inspector of Police sent one Banku Behary Pal to 28, Chutarpara Lane, with a slip of paper containing the names of 16 horses and with an amount of betting to be placed on horses and also a marked Rs. 5 note asking him to go inside the house and to bet there.2. Banku says that he handed over the money to accused 2 Brojo Mohan Saha and that when he went there a barber was giving five annas to the ...
Tag this Judgment!Bogra Loan Office, Ltd. Vs. Jyotish Chandra Chanda and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-29-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal399,165Ind.Cas.5
ORDER1. This is a Reference under Section 61, Stamp Act, by the Collector of Bogra. The document in question was admitted in evidence by the Subdivisional Munsif of Bogra exercising Small Cause Court powers in Small Cause Court Suit No. 732 of 1834, as not requiring a stamp. We have perused the documents. It appears to us to be an acknowledgment by the debtors of their liability to their creditor under a promissory note for the purposes of saving limitation containing an express promise to pay. A simple acknowledgment, which takes the case out of the Statute of limitation, implies a promise to pay. See Maniram v. Seth Rupchand, (1909) 33 Cal 1047. Such an implied promise by itself does not render the document liable to duty higher than what is required under Article (1) of Schedule (1), Stamp Act. But the addition of words such as are stated in the proviso to that article indicating an express promise to pay would make the document liable to duty as an agreement or a bond or a promisso...
Tag this Judgment!Mohini Mohan Saha Vs. Janaki Nath (Dead) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-27-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal412,166Ind.Cas.382
1. The question for consideration in this appeal is whether a mortgage was created by delivery of documents of title to immoveable property with intent to create a security thereon, in respect of a transaction of loan evidenced by a hand note executed by Janaki Nath Samanta, the father of the respondents 1 to 5 (b) in this appeal in favour of Mohini Mohan Saha, the appellant, on 6th April 1932 for Rs. 2,500. The evidence in the case before us establishes the position that before the hand-note in question, Ex. 3 in the case, was executed, Janaki Nath Samanta handed over to the appellant his title deeds in respect of his rice mill at Burdwan and the site thereof and of the adjacent land and garden, on the date on which the title deeds were delivered, a loan of Rs. 12,500 was advanced by the appellant, and Janaki Nath Samanta stated that he would take loan up to a maximum of Rs. 20,000 and that the deposit of title deeds would be the security for loan up to the said sum of Rs. 20,000. Thi...
Tag this Judgment!Priyabala Dassi and anr. Vs. Sarajubala Choudhurani and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-27-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal540
1. This is an appeal by the legal representatives of two of the plaintiffs in the suit in which the decree passed on 10th February 1913, in Suit No. 65 of 1910, in the Second Court of the Subordinate Judge, Dacca, directed that the amount of mesne profits which the plaintiffs were entitled to get from defendants in the suit was to be ascertained afterwards, according to the petition of the plaintiffs, at the time of the execution of the decree. It appears that the appellants as the legal representative of the original plaintiffs 2 (ka) and 8 applied for ascertainment of mesne profit before the Court below, and it must be taken to be established in the case before us that all the necessary representatives of those plaintiffs had not applied for substitution of their names within the time limited by law, as mentioned in Order 22, Rule 3, Civil P. C. On that state of facts the learned Subordinate Judge in the Court below held that the proceeding for ascertainment of mesne profits had abat...
Tag this Judgment!Sachindra Nath Chakravarty Vs. Trailakya Nath Chakravarty and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-27-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal576
ORDERR.C. Mitter, J.1. The two petitioners before me and sixteen other persons are the immediate landlords of an occupancy holding. The tenants transferred their holding to certain persons for a price of Rs. 90 by a registered conveyance. The notices of transfer required to be filed with the registration officer under Section 26-C, Tenancy Act, were served on all the landlords on 5th March 1935. Two of these landlords, namely, the two petitioners before me, made, on 2nd May 1935 an application for pre-emption under Section 26-F (1). They made the transferees and the remaining landlords opposite parties to their application for pre-emption. In the said application they stated that they had one anna nine gundas and two krants share in the landlords' interest and the landlords opposite parties had the remaining shares therein. Notice of this application was served on the cosharer landlords on 22nd May 1935. On 1st Juno 1935, two of them, namely the opposite parties before me, appeared and...
Tag this Judgment!Sm. Charusila Dassi Vs. Abhilas Bauri and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-24-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal804
Nasim Ali, J.1. The appellant in these three appeals filed three applications under Section 105, Ben. Ten. Act, before the Revenue Officer of Rampurhat in the district of Birbhum for settlement of fair and equitable rent of certain holdings. Before the Revenue Officer she raised the following issues under Section 105-A: (1) Are the holdings in dispute, though recorded as Mokrari in the record of rights, occupancy holdings? (2) Are the rents recorded in the record of rights the existing rent of the holdings? (3) Is she entitled to get additional rent for excess area? She paid Court fee of 12 annas for each of the holdings mentioned in her application and Rs. 20 for each of the three applications. The Revenue Officer decided against her. She filed three appeals before the Special Judge of Birbhum and paid the same Court-fee on the memoranda of appeals as she did on her applications before the Revenue Officer. The learned Judge treated the appeals as appeals arising out of suits under Sec...
Tag this Judgment!Srimati Charusila Dasi Vs. Abhilas Bauri and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-24-1936
Reported in: 168Ind.Cas.203
Nasim Ali, J.1. The appellant in these three appeals filed three applications under Sections 105, Bengal Tenancy Act, before the Revenue Officer of Rampurhat in the district oF.B.irbhum for settlement of fair and equitable rent of certain holdings. Before the Revenue Officer she raised the following issues under Sections : AIR1932Cal482 . Are the holdings in dispute, though recorded as mokrari in the Record of Rights, occupancy holdings? 23 C. 723 (F.B.) Are the rents recorded in the Record of Rights the existing rent of the holdings? 23 C.L.J. 281, A.I.R. 1916 Cal. 413 : 33 Ind. Cas. 148 : 43 C. 603, 20 C.W.N 428 : 23 C.L.J. 281 (F.B.) Is she entitled to get additional rent for excess area? She paid court-fee of 12 annas for each of the holdings mentioned in her application and Rs. 20 for each of the three applications. The Revenue Officer decided against her. She filed three appeals before the Special Judge oF.B.irbhum and paid the same court-fee on the memorandum of appeals as she d...
Tag this Judgment!Zubaida Sultan Begum Vs. Dawood Ismail Makra and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-23-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal407,175Ind.Cas.895
Ameer Ali, J.1. In this matter I have just given directions as to drawing up the decree and I consider it desirable that I should state my reasons for so doing. This particular matter has been the cause of some inconvenience both to counsel for the plaintiff and myself. The suit is to recover money lent to mutawalis generally for the purposes of the wakf, and in this instance in particular, for the repairs to a mosque. The prayer was for judgment 'against the defendants as such mutawalis or in the alternative against the defendants personally'. This case did not come into the undefended list, as often happens, but there was an application under Ch. 13-A. The summons asked merely for 'final judgment against the defendants'. At the hearing of the application, counsel Mr. Basu asked me to amend the summons by including 'as mutawalis of the wakf estate'. I expressed misgivings but acceded to his request and passed a decree subject to further consideration when the matter should be referred...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »