Kolkata Court August 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.
Herbert Carberry Vs. Clark and Greig Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-11-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal172
McNair, J.1. The plaintiff sold to the Thaton Sugar Works, Ltd., machinery and plant required for their factory, and a letter, dated 5th February 1934 from the managing agents of the Sugar Works to the plaintiff, contains a confirmation of the agreement that the machinery was to remain the property of the vendor until paid for in full. In the middle of March 1934 the Sugar Works, although they had only paid a part of the purchase price to the plaintiff, purported to mortgage the machinery and plant to Clark and Greig, Ltd., who in the following year sued on their security in the District Court of Thaton in Burmah and got a receiver appointed The Sugar Works went into voluntary liquidation and the mortgagees had the machinery and plant sold in the mortgage suit, with the consent of the liquidators for Rs. 95,000.2. The plaintiff alleges that this price was grossly inadequate and he has brought a suit in this Court for, among other reliefs, recovery of the balance of the purchase money d...
Ramdhone Bulakidas Vs. Kedarnath Mohata and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-10-1936
Reported in: AIR1938Cal1,173Ind.Cas.828
Ameer Ali, J.1. This suit turns upon a question of lis pendens. The short facts are as follows : Counsel were each good enough to hand me a list of dates. That supplied to me on white paper, I think by Mr. Chatterjee, is in tabular form, and may remain with the record as showing in detail the position with which I have to deal. I only propose to state the essentials. We are concerned with four suits : (1) Suit No. 31 of 1924 filed on 3rd January 1924, which has been referred to as the partition suit, although in point of fact it was filed by the plaintiff for a declaration that the property belonged wholly to him. It became in substance, owing to the rejection of the plaintiff's contention, a suit for partition of the properties mentioned in Schedule A to the plaint : see pages 5, 7, 17 and 19 of the agreed brief of documents. These references show that the defendant did not accept the list of properties in Ex. A as a complete list of the properties to be partitioned. The premises with...
Radhika Mohan Munshi Vs. Sudhir Chandra Sanyal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-07-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal10
Jack, J.1. This appeal has arisen out of a suit for recovery of Rs. 1,174-14-0 claimed as arrears of monthly allowance on a deed of annuity with interest. The deed was executed by one Radharaman Munshi whose estate has now devolved upon the defendant according to a will made by him. The deed was executed in 1298 in favour of Harish Chandra Sanyal and his brother Ramesh Chandra Sanyal. Harish has married the daughter of Radharaman. Harish's wife died before the date of the deed leaving two minor daughters. Harish married again and had two sons of whom plaintiff 1 is one and plaintiff 2 is the widow of the other, while plaintiff 3 is the brother of Harish. By the annuity deed Radharaman granted an allowance of Rs. 25 per month to Harish and Ramesh and to their heirs and made the amount charge upon some of his properties. Plaintiff 1 and plaintiff 3 and the two beneficiaries under the deed brought the suit alleging that the allowance for the period from Baisak 1332 to Ashar 1335 is in arr...
Phani Bhusan Kumar Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-07-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal637
Nasim Ali, J.1. The appellant has been convicted by the Fourth Presidency Magistrate of Calcutta under Section 44, Calcutta Police Act (Act 4 of 1866) and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 400, in default one month's rigorous imprisonment. The accused was charged with keeping a common gaming house in the office of the Deputy Accountant General, Posts and Telegraphs, situate at No. 7 Koilaghat Street, and allowing persons to gamble on race horses on Bombay races for gain of money at about 1 p. m., on 28th March 1936. He is an Assistant in that office. On 28th March 1936 at about 1 p. m., while he was working at his table in the office room, Inspector R.N. Gupta of the Calcutta Police searched the appellant's person and table on the authority of a search warrant issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, under Section 46 of the Act and seized three slips of paper Exs. 2, 3 and 4, a slip pad Ex. 5 and a leather purse containing Rs. 30-4-1 1/2. There is no evidence in this case to show that...
Sm. Annabati Dassi and ors. Vs. Parmeswar Mullick and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-07-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal751
D.N. Mitter, J.1. It appears that the appellants filed an appeal against the final decree in a suit for partition. The main grounds on which this appeal has been rested relate to an omission of the provision for maintenance of the appellants in the final decree for partition and although there are three grounds which possibly might lend colour to the contention of the respondents that the appeal is directed against the allotment made by the final decree, the learned advocate for the appellants is now prepared to delete those 'three grounds and to confine his case only to the question of maintenance. It appears that the memorandum of appeal was presented on 28th June 1935, and on 17th July 1935 the Registrar passed this order. 'Let the part of the decree be accepted at present subject to objection by the respondents, when they appear.' The report of the commissioner which included a large number of maps was made a part of the decree. The portion of the certified copy of the decree which...
Ranjit Kumar Bose Vs. Subodh Chandra Basu Mallik and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-05-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal252
D.N. Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal on behalf of the plaintiff appearing through his next friend and mother Srimati Lilabati Bose against the decision of the Subordinate Judge at Alipore who decreed the suit for partition in part. It appears that one Krishnadas Basu Mallik died possessed of considerable properties which are the subject-matter of the suit for partition in which this appeal arises. Before his death which happened in 1906 he is alleged to have executed a will in the year 1902 on the 19 th October. Krishnadas died leaving him surviving two sons Peary Mohan Basu Mallik and Jogendra Nath Basu Mallik. Peary Mohan had six sons, the eldest being Mohendra. Jogendra had four sons one of whom Provash predeceased him. Provash died in 1929 and Jogendra died on 21st January 1930. Provash left behind him a son Ranjit who is the plaintiff in the suit. The defendants to the suit are Subodh Chandra Basu Mallik, Probodh Chandra Basu Mallik and Nirmal Chandra Basra Mallik, the other three ...
Sailendra Krishna Choudhury Vs. Harendra Kumar Boy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-04-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal4
D.N. Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal by the assignee of the decree-holder against an order of the Subordinate Judge, Dacca, dismissing his application for execution of decree which is said to be partly preliminary and partly final. It is unfortunate that the respondent has not appeared in this case, but although Mr. Das for the appellant has fairly placed the case before us, the absence of the respondent is a sensible disadvantage. It becomes necessary to examine the facts of the case and the legal arguments a little more carefully than it would have been necessary if the respondents had been represented before us.2. It appears that Harendra Kumar Roy, the respondent, brought a suit for partition of certain immovable properties and for dissolution and winding up of certain ijmali karbars belonging to the parties in the suit against Pulin Krishna Roy and others. That suit was numbered as Suit Number 302 of 1918 and in that suit a final decree for partition and a preliminary decree for ac...
Abdul Haque and ors. Vs. Sm. Tarabannessa and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-04-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Cal572
Edgley, J.1. In the suit out of which this appeal arises, the plaintiffs sued the defendants for recovery of joint possession of an eight annas share in certain disputed land or in the alternative for a declaration of their right of easement in respect of this land. The land in dispute consists of a narrow channel immediately to the north of a District Board Road, which connects a Doba belonging to the plaintiffs, situated immediately to the south of their homestead with a khal to the west of some land belonging to the principal defendants. Admittedly the plaintiffs and the defendants are mokarari lease holders under the same landlords. It would appear that their ancestors partitioned their property about 80 years ago and, as a result of this partition, the predecessors of the plaintiffs acquired an allotment to the east of the channel whereas the allotment of the predecessors of the defendants fell to the north of the channel. The learned Munsif held that the plaintiffs were entitled ...
Shib Chandra Roy Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-04-1936
Reported in: AIR1936Cal686,165Ind.Cas.847
Cunliffe, J.1. We granted this rule on a point of law based upon the principle of autrefois acquit laid down in Section 403, Criminal P. C. The petitioner was originally tried for an offence under Section 283, Penal Code, and sentenced to pay a fine with a term of imprisonment in default of the fine. Section 283 is widely drawn, Section dealing with criminal acts causing danger to property, obstruction or injury to persons in a public highway or in a public line of navigation. After that conviction, the petitioner went up on appeal. On appeal, he was acquitted somewhat technically perhaps on the ground that the place which he had obstructed was not a navigable river as during considerable portions of the year, it consisted of a dry bed and the learned appellate Court Judge relied on a definition of 'navigable river' laid down in the Government Estates Manual. Whether the learned Judge was right in specifically relying upon a definition which I should regard as being rather more executi...
Sailendra Krishna Choudhury Vs. Harendra Kumar Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-04-1936
Reported in: 167Ind.Cas.430
D.N. Mitter, J.1.This is an appeal by the assignee of the decree-holder against an order of the Subordinate Judge, Dacca, dismissing his application for execution of decree which is said to be partly preliminary and partly final. It is unfortunate that the respondent has not appeared in this case, but although Mr. Das for the appellant has fairly placed the case before us, the absence of the respondent is a sensible disadvantage. It becomes necessary to examine the facts of the case and the legal arguments a little more carefully than it would have been necessary if the respondents had been represented before us.2. It appears that Harendra Kumar Roy, the respondent, brought a suit for partition of certain immovable properties and dissolution and winding up of certain Ijmali karbars belonging to the parties in; the suit against Pulin Krishna Roy and others. That suit was numbered as Suit So.302 of 1918 and in that suit a final Decree for partition and preliminary decree for accounts wer...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »