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.
J.H. Rayfield Vs. Raj Narain
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-13-1936
Reported in: 170Ind.Cas.653
Packridge, J.1. This is an application on behalf of the defendant asking for a review of a decree passed by me on March 4, 1936.2. The following are the circumstances which have led up to the application. The plaintiff filed a suit against the defendant in 1930 asking for a decree for commission which he said was due in respect of certain contracts to supply timber and sleepers to the Railways, which the plaintiff had been instrumental in obtaining for the defendant. On August 14, 1931, a consent decree was passed by Buckland, J., and it was referred to an Officer of the Court to report as to which of the contracts mentioned in the plaint remained unexecuted or unfulfilled owing to the default or negligence of the defendanti and as to what amount, if any, was due to the plaintiff by the defendant by way of damages or by way of commission. The dispute arose because of a term in the agreement, whereby the defendant not only undertook to pay commission on timber actually supplied, but als...
Rash Behari Shaw (Handa) and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-10-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal753
1. The appellants in these appeals are Rash Behari Shaw, Sushil Kumar Ghose, Patal Chandra Santra, Jagadish Singh, Manindra Nath Dey, Babulal Chowkhani, Ganesh Bahadur and Sailendra Nath Mukherji. They together with four other persons, Panchkari Banerji, Kumud Nath Nandy, Sailendra Nath Sanyal, and Harnarian Chatterji were jointly tried before the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta, and as a result of the trial the present appellants were convicted and sentenced on various charges, and the other four persons were acquitted. All the accused persons were charged with having been parties to a criminal conspiracy to commit theft by dishonest consumption and user of electrical energy belonging to the Calcutta Electric Supply Corporation between the month of January 1934 and 20th January 1935, and in consequence of such conspiracy theft was committed at the Bharat Laxmi Cinema, at the Jupiter Cinema and at other places. They were charged with being parties to this conspiracy together with...
Soofi Munshi Azahar HossaIn and anr. Vs. Amir Ahmed and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-07-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal261
Ameer Ali, J.1. This suit relates to premises Nos. 5, 7 and 7/1, McLeod Street. No. 3/1 is a mosque standing on approximately one cotta of land. No. 3/1, McLeod Street, is comparatively recent. No. 5, McLeod Street, was formerly No. 4, Goristhan Lane. Nos. 7 and 7/1 were formerly No. 4/5, Goristhan Lane. No. 4/4, Goristhan Lane is now No. 6 and 6/1, McLeod Street. Before I deal with the facts, there being numerous parties, I shall mention how the parties are interested. Defendant 1 now claims to be entitled to the whole of No. 7, McLeod Street, less one room. Defendant 2 claims to be entitled to half of No. 7/1 plus a down stair room in No. 7. Defendant 3 is the widow of one Sachindranath Mitter who bought a leasehold interest in No. 7/1, and the room, the leasehold however being of considerable value. Defendants 4, 9, 10 and 11, are the representatives of the purchaser of the entirety of No, 5. Defendant 6 is the holder of a decree in execution of which. Amir Ahmed, defendant 1, and d...
Surendra Kumar Guha Vs. Jamini Kumar Guha and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-07-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal723,166Ind.Cas.178
R.C. Mitter, J.1. The petitioner instituted a suit for recovery of money against opposite parties Nos. 2 to 8 in the Second.Court of the Munsif at Feni, being Money Suit No. 501 of 1934. Some immoveable property of the said opposite parties was attached before judgment on 19th March 1934, on his application. He obtained his decree on 4th September 1934, and on 4th February 1935, applied for execution of his decree in that Court (Money Execution Case No. 32 of 1935). The opposite party No. 1 also obtained a money decree against the said opposite parties Nos. 2 to 8 in a suit instituted by him in the first Court of the Munsif at Feni and on 19th November 1934, applied in that Court for execution (Money Execution Case No. 445 of 1934). The properties which had been attached before judgment by the petitioner were attached by the First Court of the Munsif at Feni on 20th December 1934. In the sale proclamation issued by that Court, 11th March 1935 was the date fixed for sale. On 8th March 1...
Sudhamoyee Bose Vs. Bhujendra Nath Biswas and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-06-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal225
McNair, J.1. This is a suit to recover a sum of Rs. 1,393-3-0, the balance due in respect of a decree in a rent suit in the First Munsif's Court at Nadia. The claim is based on certain agreements set out in the plaint. The pedigree of the family is set out in para. 1 of the plaint. The head of the family was Radha Jiban Mustaphy who died in 1892. Radha Jiban had a patni interest in Mouza Lakhipur granted by the predecessor in title of the plaintiffs. The patni interest devolved on Radha Jiban's daughters Jogmaya, Padmabati and Bhababhabini. Padmabati and Jogmaya in 1916 executed leases in favour of Bhujendra, Jogmaya's eldest son. Bhujendra is said to have been the nominee on behalf of all the defendants in his branch of the family who will be called for brevity's sake the Biswas defendants. Bhababhabini's descendants have been referred to as the Ghose defendants.2. On 1st February 1932 the plaintiffs obtained a rent decree for Rs. 1,636-10-11 against Jogmaya, Padmabati and Bhababhabin...
Khatejan Bibi Vs. Haji Mahomed Yusuf and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-06-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal721
D.N. Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff from the decision of the Additional District Judge of 24-Parganas dated 26th January 1933 reversing the decision of the Subordinate Judge of the same district dated 27th March 1931 by which he decreed plaintiff's suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession of the properties mentioned in the schedule to the plaint. The case stated in the plaint is that the land in suit belonged to one Pecheruddi Mistri who died leaving him surviving him his son Belatali, his daughter Khatijan Bibi, (plaintiff) and his wife Abujan Bibi. Belatali died leaving behind him two wives, Nakjan and Kossiman, his sister Khatijan (the plaintiff) and his mother Abujan. Abujan is dead and plaintiff claims 6 annas 13 gandas 1 kara share of the property which she inherited from Pecheruddi and his heirs. It is further stated in the plaint that plaintiff's brother got an Ammukhtarnama executed by her and her mother and Nekjan Bibi, alleging that the execu...
Monindra Lal Chatterjee Vs. Hari Pada Ghose and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-03-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal650,166Ind.Cas.608
R.C. Mitter, J.1. This appeal is on behalf of the defendant. It is directed against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Birbhum, which have affirmed the judgment and decree of the Munsif of Suri. The defendant has been held liable to render account from 1313 to 1337 B.S., and a Commissioner has been appointed to take accounts. Hari Pada Ghose, plaintiff 1, Guru Pada Ghose, the father of the minor plaintiff 2, and plaintiff 3, Gokul Mohini Dassi, wife of Rakhal Das Sarcar, now dead, were the owners of some zemindary and other properties. Hari Pada and Guru Pada were both minors before 1313; the latter who was the eldest of the two attained majority in 1313. At the time when both of them were minors, Rakhal Das Sarcar was appointed their guardian by the District Judge. As such guardian he appointed the defendant-appellant an agent of the minor's estate. His wife also appointed the same gentleman as her agent. The duties of the defendant were to collect the rents and pr...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›