Kolkata Court July 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.
Hukumchand Jute Mills Ltd. Vs. Anglo-oriental Bag Co. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal319,173Ind.Cas.486
Cunliffe, J.1. The plaintiffs in this case are the Hukumchand Jute Mills, Ltd., sellers of shipped goods under a special contract for sale. The first defendants are their buyers, the Anglo-Oriental Bag Co., Ltd. The second defendants are the Calcutta agents of the owners of the steamship known as the 'MARHATTA'. The third defendants are Messrs. Broekle-bank, owners of the 'MARHATTA'.2. It is not disputed that the plaintiffs are the unpaid vendors of these goods. The 1st defendants do not contest the suit. They are said to be in insolvent circumstances. Defendants 1 and 2 put in a joint written statement. In my opinion, the decision in this case before me is concluded by the judgment of the Court of appeal in Nippon Yusen Kaisha v. Mahaliram Ranjeedas : AIR1931Cal269 . The pleadings between the parties in that case and in the case before me now were almost identical. In Nippon Yusen Kaisha v. Mahaliram Ranjeedas, Nippon Yusen Kaisha v. Mahaliram Ranjeedas : AIR1931Cal269 the Court of ap...
Kalipada Mondal Vs. Kali Kinkar Chatterjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal674,165Ind.Cas.827
ORDERM.C. Ghose, J.1. In this case the petitioner purchased a gramophone from the shop of the complainant, paid Rs. 80 and promised to pay Rs. 9 per month for ten months. This was in October 1934. Thereafter the petitioner paid nothing. About ten months afterwards the complainant went to his house and asked for the machine. The petitioner could not immediately produce it and a criminal complaint was lodged. The petitioner produced the machine in Court. He has been convicted under Section 406, I. P. C. Upon perusal of the papers it appears that it is a matter of civil dispute. It was the business of the complainant not to sell his machine unless he could see reasonable prospect of monthly instalments. If traders pass on their goods to improvident and impecunious persons, they must suffer the loss. The mere non payment of monthly instalments cannot be considered as a criminal offence. As for the delay in producing the machine, it was actually produced in Court. There is no finding that h...
Abdul Kader Chaudhury Vs. Upendra Lal Barua and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-23-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal711
R.C. Mitter, J.1. The subject matter of the suit is a strip of land being the Western portion of the Southern Bank of a certain tank. The Eastern portion of the Southern Bank admittedly is the property of the Aryya Mitra Institution, a school of which the defendants are the members of the committee. The suit lands are described in schedule Ka of the plaint. The plaintiff's case is that the Western portion and the Eastern portion of the Southern as well as the other banks of the tank were at some time ejmali properties of the plaintiff's and the defendants' predecessors in title. There was a partition and the Western portion of the Southern Bank was allotted exclusively to the share of the plaintiff's predecessor The plaintiff has instituted this suit on the ground that the property described in Schedule Ka falls within his exclusive property but he was dispossessed from it in the year 1928 when there was an encroachment made and some huts of the school were built upon a portion of it. ...
Henrietta Violet Wenken Bach (Otherwise Taylor) Vs. Otto Guenter Wenke ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-23-1936
Reported in: 169Ind.Cas.948
Costello, J.1. This suit raises questions of very great public importance and the decision which I have to give not only affects the rights and the status of the actual parties to these proceedings bat may also have a bearing upon the status of persons who are in no way connected with these proceedings as there may be other persons in India who are in the same position as the petitioner as regards divorce and subsequent marriage. The legitimacy of children may even be affected.2. The points mised in this case are of such general importance that I thought' it right to ask the Advocate-General of Bengal to appear or be represented before me in order that in the public interest all aspects of the matter might be fully discussed: Mr. Westmacott and Mr. Clough have appeared and argued on behalf of the Advocate-General and I am very much indebted to them for the very full and able assistance which they have rendered to the Court.3. The suit is one for a declaration that the marriage which to...
Fani Bhusan Saha and ors. Vs. Fulkumari Dasi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-21-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal1
1. This is an appeal from a preliminary decree for partition and accounts; the facts of the case, shortly put, are the following. One Hiralal Shaha died in 1292 B.S.=1886 leaving seven sons, one of whom was Jogendra, who died later on in 1905 leaving a widow Radharani and two daughters Fulkumari and Santashila. The suit was instituted on 27th September 1924 by Radharani. The defendants in the suit are some of the other sons and the heirs of the deceased, sons of the said Hiralal Shaha. During the pendency of the suit Radharani died and the two daughters Fulkumari and Santashila got themselves substituted as plaintiffs in her place. The facts, as alleged in the plaint, were that the plaintiff Radharani was entitled to have a partition of the properties left by Hiralal Shaha inasmuch as under his will each of the sons was entitled to a 1/7th share in the property. Her case was that although under the will the life interest in the said share was given, yet the gift in respect of the resid...
Giridhari Lal and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-21-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal678,165Ind.Cas.817
JUDGEMENTCunliffe, J.1. The four appellants here were convicted by the Chief Presidency Magistrate of offences for cheating under Section 420 of the Code read with the conspiracy Section 120-B and they were also convicted of individual offences of cheating. The learned Magistrate refrained from passing separate sentences under the conspiracy charges but he sentenced each of them to two years' rigorous imprisonment on the bare cheating convictions. It is a very bad case indeed of organised and up to discovery successful attempts at swindling traders by means of the persons concerned putting themselves forward as being members of a reputable firm of buyers. The firm which they invented had no existence. They called it a firm of Gangadhar Beni Prosad, and their method was to hire and lock up a room, keep a durwan there and operate from this place obtaining goods by swindling. After they had obtained the goods they would resell them at prices under the market rate and it was through a poli...
Surjya Kumar Naik Vs. Bijoy Kumar Hazra
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-21-1936
Reported in: 170Ind.Cas.672
Williams, J.1. This is a mortgage suit against the first three defendants and the Official Assignee of Calcutta in respect of a mortgage dated April 20, 1934. The suit was instituted on August 6, 1935, and, the plaintiff had to join the Official Assignee M a defendant owing to the provisions of Order XXXIV, Rule 1 of the; Code of Civil Procedure, the first three defendants having been adjudicated insolvent on May 10, 1934.2. The suit is undefended by the first three defendants, but the, Official Assignee has filed a written statement in which he denies the mortgage, and says that at the time when the mortgage suit was instituted, the defendants were insolvent and that this was not made in good faith or for valuable consideration, but was collusive and fraudulent and- he submits that it is void as against him.3. The relevant dates are as follows:On April 13, 1934, the defendants told a number of their creditors that they were unable to meet their obligations until they had got in certai...
Sm. Bibhabati Debi and anr. Vs. Mahendra Chandra Lahiri and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-17-1936
Reported in: AIR1938Cal34,173Ind.Cas.857
Costello, J. 1. This is an appeal from a judgment of Ameer Ali J. whereby he rejected the claim made by the plaintiffs for the delivery up to them of a Government promissory note of the face value of Rs. 9,000. This Government promissory note passed under the will of one Ganga Prosad Goswami who was a Zamindar of Serampore in the District of Hooghly. This will was made in the Bengali language and was dated 28th October 1864. By that will, the eldest son of the testator, one Hem Chunder Goswami, was appointed executor of the will. The testator died within a few years of the making of the will. The will was duly proved by Hem Chunder Goswami in this Court and probate of the will was issued to him. In the present suit the two plaintiffs who are the granddaughters of the testator were alleging in the alternative that their grandmother, one of the daughters of the testator, during her lifetime became absolutely entitled to the Government promissory note which was the subject matter of the s...
Nirmal Chandra Sanyal and anr. Vs. Municipal Commissioners
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-17-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal707
R.C. Mitter, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge of Pabna who has partly reversed the judgment and decree of the Second Court of the Munsif of that place. The defendants, the Commissioners of the Municipality of Pabna, have referred cross-objections and as the cross-objections go to the root of the matter, I have heard the respondent's advocate first in support of his cross-objections. In 1918 the Commissioners of the Pabna Municipality had reserved a part of the Strand Road, in front of the plaintiffs' land, as a hackney carriage stand. At that time the Calcutta Hackney Carriage Act of 1891 (2 of 1891, B. C.) was in force. The said Act had been extended to the Municipal limits of the town of Pabna by Notification No. 1008 T. M., dated 4th November 1913. The said notification is in the following terms:In exercise of the power conferred by Section (1), Clause (3), Calcutta Hackney Carriage Act 2 of 1891, the ...
Rabindra Nath Chandra Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-14-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal652
Cunliffe, J.1. We granted this Rule on the question of sentence alone. The petitioner, one Rabindra Nath Chandra, was convicted under Section 35, Bengal Suppression of Terrorist Outrages Act, 1932, by a Magistrate at Midnapore and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment. Section 35 deals with the possession of literature connected with the terrorist movement. It provides that if a person has knowingly in his possession literature which has been declared to be forfeited to His Majesty under the law, he shall be punishable with imprisonment which may amount to three years and the learned Deputy Legal Remembrancer has told us that no action is taken under this section unless the statutory condition precedent contained in Section 38 has been followed, which section deals with the preliminary to a complaint being made under the. Special Terrorist Act, where the Local Government or the District Magistrate have to consider the question of the prosecution itself by forming an opinion abo...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »