Kolkata Court January 1938 Judgments
Kumar Narendra Nath Mitter Vs. Sm. Bimala Sundari Debi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-31-1938
Reported in: AIR1938Cal573
Panckridge, J.1. The plaintiff in this suit asks for an account against the first defendant who is the widow and personal representative of one Bangsadhar Chakravarty who died on 5th July 1932. The cause of action arose out of a written agreement dated 10th November 1925, whereby Bangsadhar Chakravarty undertook the duties of Naib of a certain Touzi belonging to the plaintiff. The other defendants are sued as the guarantors or the representatives of the deceased guarantors of the proper performance by Bangsadhar Chakravarty of his obligations under the agreement. The defendants Sridhar and Basanta are brothers of Bangsadhar Chakravarty, and surviving guarantors. The defendants Shibnath and Shambhunath are the representatives of Adhar, a deceased guarantor who died in 1935, and the defendants Madhai, Nitai and Khoka are the representatives of Sreehari another deceased guarantor who died in 1935. No written statements have been filed by the representative of Adhar or by Basanta. Bimala S...
Tag this Judgment!Uchmatan Bibi W/O Kazi Abdul Azim and ors. Vs. Rajendra Nath Sanyal an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-31-1938
Reported in: AIR1938Cal689
M.C. Ghose, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendants in a suit for declaration of title and recovery of khas possession of the lands in suit consisting of two gardens. Upon 'hearing the learned advocates on both sides, it appears that the lands in suit belonged to one Ramdoyal who held the same on a rental of Rs. 3 per annum. He died in April 1914 leaving two widows Atarmoni and Saroshi Bala. Atarmoni made a deed of relinquishment of her share to the younger widow Saroshi Bala who however died in 1916 and thereby Atarmoni again possessed her husband's estate as the surviving widow. While she was possessing the lands one of the landlords under whom she held another jama instituted a suit and obtained a decree. The decree was transferred to another person who executed it and attached the lands in suit. The attachment was made on 21st June 1919. Within a month thereafter the widow Atarmoni transferred these lands on 30th July 1919 to Jugalmohini, the mother of the two reversioners, Pachco...
Tag this Judgment!H.R.H. Bull Vs. Mrs. B.S. Bull
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-31-1938
Reported in: AIR1938Cal684
McNair, J.1. This is a husband's suit for a declaration of nullity of marriage under the Divorce Act. Both the petitioner and the respondent are domiciled in India and profess the Christian religion. The ceremony of marriage was performed on 11th May 1928 in Darjeeling. The petition alleged that the marriage had never been consummated and that the respondent at the time of the said marriage and ever since has been incapable of consummating the same. In her answer the respondent alleged that she was at all times and is now capable of consummating the marriage and the marriage has in fact been consummated. The parties met at Kurseong through the petitioner's sister during the Pujas of 1926. In 1927 they met at the Jalpaiguri Camp on the footing of an engaged couple. They were married on 11th May 1928 at Darjeeling. They lived at Darjeeling for four or five days with her parents at Francis Villa, thereafter for a fortnight in Calcutta until they sailed for England from Bombay. They stayed...
Tag this Judgment!Cross (inspector of Taxes) Vs. London Provincial Trust, Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-31-1938
Reported in: [1939]7ITR109(Cal)
GREENE, M.R. - The question involved can be stated in a few words. It is this : Were the funding bonds when received 'income arising from securities outside the United Kingdom' The Crown says that they were moneys worth received in satisfaction of interest payable under the original bonds. The respondents say that they have received no income from those bonds, in that all that they have received is a substituted promise to pay the interest at a future date with interest thereon in the meantime.It is not open to question that income can be in the form of moneys worth. Nor it is pen to question that if the holder of a security, the contractual income from which is money, receives from the person liable to pay that money something of moneys worth (for example, goods) instead of money, such goods are income arising from the security; Scottish and Canadian General Investment Co. v. Easson, where debentures of a new company were received in place of interest due on bonds issued by an old com...
Tag this Judgment!Sashti Gopal Samui and anr. Vs. Haridas Bagdi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-1938
Reported in: AIR1938Cal415
Henderson, J.1. This rule was issued calling upon the District Magistrate of Burdwan to show cause why the conviction of the petitioners and the sentences passed upon them should not be set aside. The rule raises a question of general importance and it was directed that it should be heard by the Division Bench and that notice should be given to the Crown to appear. The facts of the case are these : The petitioners were put on their trial before a Magistrate of the third class who recorded the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. The Magistrate then thought that the evidence disclosed an offence which he was not competent to try and he sent the case, under the provisions of Section 346, Criminal P.C., to the Sub-divisional Magistrate. It was then transferred for trial to a Deputy Magistrate of the first class. He did not start a de novo trial but went on with the proceedings from the stage which they had already reached.2. It is now contended that when a case has been transferred unde...
Tag this Judgment!Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs Vs. NabIn Chandra Hur
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-1938
Reported in: AIR1938Cal416
Henderson, J.1. These two rules were issued calling upon the opposite party, one Nabin Chandra Hur, to show cause why two orders made by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Sylhet directing the Magistrate to commit the petitioner to the Court of Session for trial should not be' set aside. The petitioner is a clerk working in the Treasury in the District of Sylhet. Defalcations in stamps were discovered and it is the prosecution case that it was the petitioner who was responsible. They further alleged that in order to cover up his crime he made false entries in certain monthly returns known as plus and minus memos. He was put on his trial before a First Class Magistrate who framed three charges against him under Section 409, I.P.C. In the course of the trial he made an application to the Court of Session and the learned Sessions Judge directed the; Magistrate to commit him for trial. The first point to notice is that this order of the learned Judge is entirely without jurisdiction....
Tag this Judgment!Corporation of Calcutta Vs. Bon Behary Shaw
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-1938
Reported in: AIR1938Cal581
Lort-Williams, J.1. In this suit, instituted in April 1935, the Corporation of Calcutta claims to enforce a statutory charge for Rs. 1937-11-0 on account of consolidated rates due in respect of premises No. 122, Manicktolla Street, Calcutta. These rates became due between 15th October 1931 and 15th January and include both the owner's and the occupier's shares. The suit is now contested only on behalf of defendant 1, Bon Behary Shaw, who is sued both personally and as shebait of certain Thakurs.2. The material facts are that one Banku Behary Shaw died in 1927, leaving a will whereby he dedicated and bequeathed absolutely to certain deities the outer portion of the premises in suit, and bequeathed the remaining portion to his four sons in equal shares absolutely, which portions are delineated as A and B, respectively, on a plan annexed to the will, and he appointed his son, Bon Behary Shaw sole executor and sole shebait. Bon Behary Shaw obtained probate of the will in March 1928, and in...
Tag this Judgment!Hem Nalini Devi Vs. Nishith Nath Kundu, Principal Defendant and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-1938
Reported in: AIR1939Cal256
ORDERM.C. Ghose, J.1. This is an application under Section 25, Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, by the plaintiff whose suit on a promissory note has been dismissed by the trial Court. Upon hearing the learned advocates on both sides, it appears that the facts are as follows : On 30th January 1928, opposite party No. 1 borrowed Rs. 100 from the Dinajpur banch office of the Natore Bank and Rice Mill Ltd. The document was to this effect : 'To the managing agents, Bank and Rice Mills Ltd. I borrow from the Dinajpur branch office the sum of Rs. 100, etc.' Afterwards, the Natore Bank and Rice Mills Ltd., fell into bad position and could not meet all their depositors. Thereupon, they held a special meeting of the share-holders whereby they sought the permission of the Registrar of joint stock companies that they might pay their creditors by means of promissory notes, bonds and other documents instead of by cash. The Registrar by his order dated October 1933, authorized them to meet their de...
Tag this Judgment!Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs Bengal Vs. NabIn Chan ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-1938
Reported in: 175Ind.Cas.521
Hennderson, J.1. These two rules were issued calling upon the opposite party, one Nabin Chandra Hur, to show cause why two orders made by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Sylhet directing tie Magistrate to commit the petitioner to the Court of Session for trial should not be set aside. The petitioner is a clerk working in the Treasury in the District of Sylhet. Defalcations in stamps were discovered and it is the prosecution case that it was the petitioner who was responsible. They further alleged that in order to cover up his crime he made false entries in certain monthly returns known as plus and minus memos. He was put on his trial before a First Class Magistrate who framed three charges against him under Section 409, Indian Penal Code. In the course of the trial he made an application to the Court of Session and the learned Sessions Judge directed the Magistrate to commit him for trial. The first point to notice is that this order of the learned Judge is entirely without ju...
Tag this Judgment!Surama Sundari Debi Vs. Kiranshashi Chowdhurani
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-27-1938
Reported in: AIR1938Cal352
ORDERM.C. Ghose, J.1. This is an application under Section 115, Civil P.C. The facts in short are that there was a decree against the deceased husband of the petitioner. The property in suit was attached in November 1933. In December 1933, the petitioner made a claim to say that the property did not belong to her husband but belonged to herself. On 3rd February 1934, her application was 'dismissed for default. Thereafter, on 21st March 1934, the property was sold in auction and purchased by the opposite party. The sale was confirmed on 21st January 1934. Then the opposite party auction-purchaser applied under Order 21, Rule 95, Civil P.C. on 31st May 1934 for delivery of possession to him. The Court issued a writ for delivery of possession. Possession could not be given on account of resistance by 'the petitioner. Thereupon on 15th June 1934, the opposite party made an application under Order 21, Rule 97. That application was dismissed for default on 10th November 1934. Within three ye...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »