Kolkata Court April 1937 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.
Tulsi Debya Vs. Bibhuti Bhusan Goswami and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-1937
Reported in: AIR1937Cal423,173Ind.Cas.429
S.K. Ghose, J.1. The petitioner in this rule is the widow of one Indra Narain Goswami who died intestate on the 17th Falgun 1341 and according to the petitioner she is the sole heiress. The petitioner's husband assured his life on 15th May 1926, when he was a bachelor, with the Sun Life Assurance Company for a sum of Rs. 1,500. According to the terms of this policy the amount would be payable to the assured on 15th May 1946; but if he should die earlier then the amount would be payable to his second brother Promotha Nath Goswami or in the event of his death to the executors or administrators of the assured. On the death of Indra Narain the petitioner filed an application for a succession certificate for enabling her to collect the amount of Rs. 1,243 which was payable under the aforesaid policy. The Courts below have agreed in rejecting the application holding that the amount of the policy was due to the second brother who was the nominee mentioned therein. It is contended for the peti...
Maulvi Abdul Jabbar Palwan Vs. Moulvi Azizar Rahaman Mea
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-15-1937
Reported in: AIR1937Cal425
Nasim Ali, J.1. This is a judgment-debtor's appeal from the order of the District Judge of Mymensingh dated 26th August 1935, whereby the learned Judge has directed execution to proceed against him. On 8th August 1927, the respondent decree-holder obtained an order for costs in his favour against the appellant from the Governor of this Province on the report of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into an election-petition. He put this order into execution in the Court of the District Judge, Mymensingh, but the execution case was dismissed after service of notice in 1929. On 12th June 1931 he filed another application in the same Court for the execution of the order. This petition was dismissed by an order of the learned Judge dated 10th October 1931. The material portion of this order is as follows:The order is not a decree of this Court; nor has it been transferred for execution to this Court by the Court which passed it. This Court has no jurisdiction to execute the order. Applica...
Harendra Kumar Ghosh and anr. Vs. Gurupada Bhowmick and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-15-1937
Reported in: AIR1937Cal452
1. Gurupada Bhowmick, respondent 1 in this appeal, instituted a suit in the second Court of the Subordinate Judge at Dacca for recovery of Rs. 7,351 from respondents 2 and 3 on the basis of two hand-notes on 25th April 1931. On 27th April 1931 he applied for attachment before judgment of some immoveable properties belonging to respondent 3. The learned Subordinate Judge thereupon passed the following order:The defendants do show cause within a week from the service of notice upon them as to why they should not furnish security to the extent of Rs. 8,000. In the meantime let the properties said to belong to defendant 2 (respondent 2 in the appeal) be attached conditionally and provisionally and let the attachment continue till vacated.2. On the next day the issue of the writ of attachment was stayed on defendant 2 giving undertaking that he would not transfer his properties. On 5th May 1931 a security bond for Rs. 8,000 executed by defendant 2 and the appellants before us was filed befo...
Kumarish Chandra Karmakar and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-15-1937
Reported in: AIR1938Cal220
Henderson, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 374, Criminal P.C., for confirmation of the sentence of death passed upon Kumariah Chandra Karmakar and Ramranjan De. There is also an appeal by these two men and by their co-accused, Pashupati Nandi who was sentenced to transportation for life. The appeal and the reference have been heard together. The facts of the case are briefly these : The deceased Dharmadas Chatterjea was a zamindar of the village Gobordhanpur, in the district of Burdwan. On 24th August last, he went to Burdwan on some business and returned to Nigan station by the evening train. He was there met by his servant Madhu Khan with a lantern. Before starting home, he stopped at the shop of Ramgopal Mukerjea for a smoke and drink after which he and his servant proceeded to go across country. In the course of the journey they had to pass along two banks of a tank. Just after the servant had crossed a ditch, the deceased was attacked by certain persons and murdered. The s...
Harendra Kumar Ghosh and anr. Vs. Gurupada Bhowmick
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-15-1937
Reported in: 173Ind.Cas.183
1. Gurupada Bhowmick, respondent No. 1 in this appeal, instituted a suit in the second Court of the Subordinate Judge at Dacca for recovery of Rs. 7,351 from respondents Nos. 2 and 3 on the basis of two hand-notes on April 25, 1931. On April 27, 1931, he applied for attachment before judgment of some immovable properties belonging to respondent No 3. The learned Subordinate Judge thereupon passed the following order;The defendants do show cause within a week from the service of notice upon them as to why they should not furnish security to the extent of Rs. 8,000. In the meantime let the properties said to belong to defendant No. 2 (respondent No. 2 in the appeal) be attached conditionally and provisionally and let the attachment continue till vacated.2. On the next day the issue of the writ of attachment was stayed on defendant No. 2 giving undertaking that he would not transfer his properties. On May 5, 1931, a security bond for Rs. 8,000 executed by defendant No. 2 and the appellant...
Suba and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-14-1937
Reported in: AIR1937Cal389
Henderson, J.1. In our opinion, there will have to be a re-trial in this case. The jurors were summoned in the proper way, but for some reason or other, the ease appears to have created a considerable amount of sensation and there were a large number of objections taken sometimes by both sides in agreement and sometimes by one side or the other. The result was that after these objections were allowed, there were not enough jurors left to proceed with the trial. The learned Judge then issued summons to three jurors whose residence happened to be in the town and had the summons immediately served upon them. The jury was finally constituted by two out of these three extra persons.2. Now, the procedure which the learned Judge ought to have followed is clearly laid down in the Code itself. It was open to the learned Judge to make up the deficiency from persons actually present whom he considered suitable. If he was unable to do this, the only other course left was to postpone the trial and ...
Satyendra Mohan Ghose Vs. Nibaran Chandra Bose and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-14-1937
Reported in: AIR1937Cal392
S.K. Ghose, J.1. This Rule raises a question of the construction of Section 34, Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act, Act 7 of 1936. The opposite parties obtained a decree upon a mortgage against the petitioner and in pursuance of that decree they applied for execution by sale of the properties. On 27th November 1936, the petitioner made an application to the Debt Settlement Board in the district of Tippera established under the Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act under Section 8 of that Act. In that application the decretal debt in question was stated and included. Thereupon the Debt Settlement Board gave notice to the Court under Rule 73 of the rules framed under the Act. On receipt of the notice the Subordinate Judge of the 3rd Court before whom the execution case is pending sent a letter to the Chairman of the Debt Settlement Board asking for information, among other things, as to whether the Board had obtained special powers under Section 7 of the Act. In reply the Chairman stated among ot...
Pratul Chandra Bhaduri and anr. Vs. Purna Chandra Bhaduri and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-14-1937
Reported in: AIR1938Cal284
1. These appeals have arisen out of a suit for partition and accounts. The plaintiff in the suit, Purna Chandra Bhaduri, and the defendants trace their descent from the common ancestor Madan Gopal Bhaduri, who had five sons : 1. Iahan Chandra Bhaduri, 2. Shib Chandra Bhaduri, 3. Jagat Chandra Bhaduri, 4. Kashi Chandra Bhaduri, and 5. Mahes Chandra Bhaduri. The fourth son of Madan Gopal, Kashi, had five sons, 1. Ram-Chandra (defendant 5), 2. Krishna Chandra, adopted son of Ishan and Indra-moni (wife of Ishan) and renamed as Hem Chandra on adoption, defendant 1, in the suit, 3. Purna Chandra, the plaintiff, and 4. Tarak Chandra, adopted son of Mahes and Umasundari (wife of Mahes), and renamed as Ramesh Chandra on adoption. Ramesh Chandra died leaving him surviving as his heirs defendants 2, 3 and 4 in the suit. The case of the plaintiff before the Court was that Shib separated from the joint family in the year 1864, and that Jagat separated in the year 1875. After these two separations, ...
Kishori Singh and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1937
Reported in: AIR1937Cal394
Biswas, J.1. The question in this Rule is whether an appeal to the Court of Sessions was barred under Section 413, Criminal P.C. The facts of the case may be briefly stated: The two petitioners were put upon their trial before a Sub-Deputy Magistrate of Howrah on charges of causing hurt under Section 323, I.P.C. The Sub. Deputy Magistrate was of opinion that the petitioners were guilty, and further, that they should be required to execute bonds under Section 106, Criminal P. C, but as being a Magistrate of the Second Class, he was not competent to make an order under this section, he dealt with the case under Section 349 of the Code, and submitted the proceedings to the Sub-divisional Magistrate who was a Magistrate of the First Class.2. The Sub-divisional Magistrate did not find it necessary to take further evidence, and agreeing with the Sub.Deputy Magistrate, found the accused guilty under Section 323. I.P.C., and sentenced each of them to pay a fine of Rs. 25, in default to undergo...
Balaram Dey and ors. Vs. Pran Ram Chatterjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1937
Reported in: AIR1937Cal406
Henderson, J.1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Burdwan recommending that the prosecution of the petitioner, for an offence punishable under Section 188, I.P.C., be quashed. The facts are these. A petition asking for action under Section 144, Criminal P.C., was filed by several persons before the Sub-divisional Magistrate of Katwa. He sent it to the President of the Union Board for report. On receipt of the report he passed an order on the petitioner under Section 144, Criminal P.C., directing him to cut a bundh or to show cause against the order. The petitioner appeared and showed cause. The Magistrate was not satisfied with the explanation and declined to cancel the order. The petitioner failed to comply with it and has been prosecuted under Section 188, I.P.C. The first ground upon which the learned Judge bases his recommendation is that an order passed in this form is illegal. Now it is clear that such an order must to some extent be infructuous, inasmuch as a ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »