Kolkata Court April 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.
Dr. Ferdinand Perier, S.J. Archbishop Vs. Kumar Krishna Nandy Choudhur ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-08-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal582
1. This is an appeal under the Letters Patent in a suit instituted by the plaintiff appellant for declaration that he was a tenant at fixed rate of rent in respect of the lands in suit. In view of an order passed in accordance with the provisions contained in Sub-section 26-D and 26-F, Ben. Ten. Act, the plaintiff in the suit prayed for the further declaration that those provisions of the law had no application to the lands in suit, and for recovery of possession of the lands, inasmuch as there was an order for preemption in favour of the defendant landlord. It would appear that the plaintiff purchased the lands in suit from a tenant under the defendant; the landlord defendant having applied under Sub-section 26-D and 26-F, Ben. Ten. Act, for exercise of the right of pre-emption, in the matter of the purchase made by the plaintiff, the application was allowed; in the order passed on the application for pre-emption made by the landlord the question of status and nature of the tenancy pu...
Bank of Dacca, Ltd. Vs. Gour Gopal Saha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-07-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal409,166Ind.Cas.855
1. This appeal has arisen out of an application under Section 47, Civil P. C. made by a person in the position of a judgment-debtor being a share-holder of a Bank, the Bank of Dacca, in liquidation against whom there were orders for recovery of money passed in favour of the Bank in liquidation in respect of unpaid calls for shares allotted to him. The applicant raising objections under Section 47, Civil P. C., respondent in this appeal, had an account with the bank of Dacca and as security against overdraft, had deposited Government Promissory Notes. These notes were deposited by the Bank of Dacca with the Bengal National Bank, and were sold by the Receiver appointed by the Court for the Bengal National Bank, and the sale-proceeds after certain deductions made therefrom on account of dues of the Bank of Dacca to the Bengal National Bank, were sent to the Liquidator of the Bank of Dacca. The amount received by the Liquidator exceeded the sum realisable from the appellant under the balan...
Naokhila Loan Co., Ltd. Vs. Hemendra Narayan Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-06-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal402,166Ind.Cas.815
1. This appeal has arisen out of an application under Section 47, Civil P. C., made by the appellant, raising objections to the execution of a decree obtained by the respondent on 3rd February 1933, in respect of the money deposited with the appellant, the Naokhila Loan Co., Ltd. The case of the appellant was that having regard to the scheme of arrangement sanctioned by this Court on 27th March 1933, under the provisions of the Companies Act, the application for execution as made by the decree-holder was not maintainable. The application under Section 47, Civil P. C., raising the objections aforesaid was resisted by the decreeholder, respondent in this Court, on the ground that he was not bound by a scheme which was passed at a meeting of the depositors after he had obtained the decree, and a scheme which was sanctioned by this Court subsequently. It is not disputed that the decree sought to be executed in the case before us was obtained before the scheme was adopted at a meeting of th...
Abdul Khaleque Mondal and ors. Vs. BepIn Behari Bose and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-06-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal465
R.C. Mitter, J.1. This appeal is on behalf of the plaintiffs and arises out of a suit for a declaration that they are entitled to the whole of the properties in suit and that the mortgage which defendant 1 had obtained from one Abdul Mataleb and the decree obtained therein is not binding on them. For the purpose of following, controversy between the parties the following genealogy is material: MEHER ALI (died 3-4-1908), w. KARIMANNESSA. ______________________________|______________________________________ | | | | | | Abdul Mataleb Abdul Rahman Abdul Khalque Marium Fatema Amina died 31-10-1915 died 30-4-1924 Plff. 1. Plff. 2. Plff. 3. Plff. 4. married Badrunnessa Plff. 6. _____________________|___________________________________ | | | | Md. Taher, Deft. 3. Samsul, Deft. 4. Sara Bibi, Deft. 5. Abu Baker, Plff. 5.2. The property belonged to Meher Ali who died on 3rd April 1908. Just before his death, that is to say on 7th March 1908, he executed a will by which he appointed his wife Kari...
Ram Prasad Chaudhury Vs. Buchi Chaudhury and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-06-1936
Reported in: 164Ind.Cas.315
Wort, Ag. C.J.1. In my judgment the judgment of the learned Judge in the Court below cannot possibly stand. It has got to be remembered that the only question with which this Court has to deal is whether the Judge in the Court below has decided any question of law erroneously. I am not entitled to reverse the decision of the Court below on a question of fact, nor do I propose to do, but having regard to what the learned Judge in the Court below has found, it will be seen, as I have said, that the judgment cannot possibly stand.2. The plaintiff brought an action for compulsory registration of a sale-deed under Section 77 of the Registration Act. The trial Court granted the plaintiff's prayer but the Appellate Court for reasons which it is impossible for me to understand has concluded that the plaintiff is not entitled to compulsory registration but he is entitled to the return of the consideration.3. Now the defence set up to this story is To this effect. That there had been an agreemen...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›