Kolkata Court January 1938 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.
Sk. AsabuddIn Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-11-1938
Reported in: AIR1938Cal399
Henderson, J. 1. The petitioner was convicted by the unanimous verdict of the jury of an offence punishable under Section 466, I.P.C. He is a clerk in the service of the Midnapore Municipality. The prosecution arose in the following way: A certain person named Gajendra Nath Pakhira instituted a title suit against one Tarapada Maity on 12th September 1934. A decree-on compromise was passed on 24th November. On 18th December an application was filed by one Nirada Dasi under Order 9, Rule 13, Civil P.C. Her case was that Tarapada was a minor and that the summons had not, therefore, been properly served. This application was dismissed on 16th February 1935. On 14th March 1935, this Nirada Dasi, describing herself as the guardian of Tarapada, instituted a title suit in order to get the compromise decree set aside on the ground of Tarapada's minority. On her behalf a certified copy of an entry in the register of births maintained by the Municipality was filed purporting to show that Tarapada...
Himalaya Assurance Co. Ltd., in Re.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-11-1938
Reported in: [1938]6ITR227(Cal)
DERBYSHIRE, C.J. - The facts of this case are set out fully in the case stated by the Commissioner of Income-tax. The question asked is :'The assessees actuarial valuation balance sheet on the last date of the last preceding valuation having shown a deficiency does the provision of Rule 25 of the rules under the Income Tax Act for ascertaining the average annual net profits of a Life Assurance Company permit the department to go behind the said valuation balance sheet to find out if there were any profits in respect of the period of the last preceding valuation ?'It appears to me that the matter is concluded by the judgment of the Privy Council in the case of Bharat Insurance Company Limited v. Commissioner of Income-tax. At page 43 (of 61 I.A.) Sir John Wallis said : 'Under the provisions of Section 5 & 6 of the Indian Life Assurance Companies Act, 1912, the companys life assurance business has to the kept entirely separate from its other businesses if any and under Sec. 8, sub-sectio...
Benoy Bhusan Chatterjee Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-07-1938
Reported in: AIR1938Cal857
Bartley, J.1. The appellant in this case, Benoy Bhusan Chatterji, was placed upon 'his trial along with two other persons Jamini Karmakar and Monoranjan Kundu, before the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Alipore. These three persons were originally committed to the Court of Session and the committing Magistrate charged all three of them under Section 120-B read with Section 302, I.P.C. He also charged the present appellant Benoy under Section 302, I.P.C., and the other accused, Monoranjan and Jamini, under Section 302/34, I.P.C. When the three accused persons were brought before the Court of Session, the Public Prosecutor withdrew the charges under Section 302 and Section 302/34 with the consent of the Court and an order was recorded acquitting the accused on these charges. The charge on which the trial actually took place was as follows:That you (namely the three accused persons) along with Ujjalendu Ganguly, Kshiroda Devi and others were parties to a criminal conspiracy and agree...
Deb Das Lala Vs. Sk. Abdul Gani and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-06-1938
Reported in: AIR1938Cal358
Nasim Ali, J. 1. This appeal arises out of a suit for ejectment after service of notice to quit under Section 106, T.P. Act. The defendant admittedly is a tenant-at-will. His defence to the suit so far as it is relevant for the purposes of the present appeal is that the notice to quit served on him is bad in law inasmuch as it did not expire with the end of a month of the tenancy. The Munsif overruled this defence and decreed the plaintiff's suit. The tenant appealed to the lower Appellate Court. The learned Subordinate Judge who heard the appeal has dismissed the plaintiff's suit for ejectment on the ground that the notice served on the defendant was insufficient. Hence this second appeal by the plaintiff landlord. The only point for determination therefore in this appeal is whether the notice served on the tenant was sufficient in law.2. The defendant admittedly held the disputed land under a registered lease which was executed by the defendant on 2nd Sravan 1318. Prom this kabuliat,...
Katyayani Dasi Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-06-1938
Reported in: AIR1938Cal475
Bartley, J.1. These appeals by the appellants are against their convictions and sentences under Sections 366 and 366-A, I. P.C. The appellants Rahim Bux and Katyayani Dasi were tried by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge of 24 Parganas with the aid of a jury. The unanimous verdict of the jury was that both the accused were guilty under Section 366, I.P.C. and that the accused Katyayani was further guilty under Section 366.A, I.P.C. The learned Judge sentenced each of them to rigorous imprisonment for seven years in spite of the recommendation by the jury that lighter punishment should be inflicted upon the woman on account of her age and 'because she had done what she did because of her excessive love for the girl Radharani.' That accused Katyayani has filed a regular appeal before this Court which is Appeal No. 264 of 1937. The appeal by her co-accused, which is Jail Appeal No. 213 of 1937, has been admitted and heard with the regular appeal. The case for the prosecution is briefly ...
Maharaja Srish Chandra Nandi Vs. Doa Mahammad Byapari and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-06-1938
Reported in: AIR1939Cal77
Nasim Ali, J.1. This appeal arises out of a proceeding under Section 105, Bengal Tenancy Act, for settlement of fair and equitable rent of a tenure. The defence of the tenure-holder is that the tenure is a permanent one and its rent is not liable to be enhanced. The Settlement Officer as well as the learned Special Judge have accepted the defence of the tenants that the tenure is a permanent one. They have however agreed in overruling the defence that the rent of the tenure is not liable to be enhanced. The Courts below accordingly have enhanced the rent of the tenure under Section 7, Bengal Tenancy Act. The landlord appeals to this Court.2. The only point, canvassed before me by Dr. Basak appearing on behalf of the appellant is that the Courts below were wrong in coming to the conclusion that the tenure in question is a permanent one. It appears that certain tenancies were purchased by defendant 1 and his father. These tenancies were not transferable without the consent of the landlor...
Manmatha Nath Sett Vs. Gobindalall Sett and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-05-1938
Reported in: AIR1939Cal135
Lort-Williams, J.1. The plaintiff sues for a declaration of the rights of the parties to this suit in the estate of one Debendra Mohan Sett, for discovery of that estate, for possession, partition, accounts and other reliefs. (His Lordship after giving the relevant pedigree proceeded.) Kristo Mohan Sett was a Hindu governed by the Dayabhaga. He died leaving a widow Prembutty Dassi, a daughter, and two sons Rajkumar and Brojo Kumar who inherited his property in undivided equal shares. Rajkumar died leaving a widow Moni Dassi and two sons, Debendra and Nripendra, who inherited the half share of their father Rajkumar. Nripendra died unmarried and his estate vested in his uncle Brojo Kumar. Debendra died intestate and childless in 1854, leaving as his sole heiress his widow Kristo Kamini, then aged about 11 years. In 1855, by her mother as guardian and next friend she filed a bill of complaint in the Supreme Court, asking for partition of the estate of Kristo Mohan Sett, and alleging that ...
Chandrakanta Bal Munshi Vs. Saharali Sheikh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-04-1938
Reported in: AIR1938Cal758
Jack, J.1. This appeal has arisen out of a suit for recovery of khas possession of the land described in the plaint and for meane profits. The holding originally was held by Bhulu who died leaving a widow and a daughter. The plaintiff alleges that after his death his widow left the place and the plaintiff landlord took possession treating the holding as abandoned and held it in khas till 1311 B. S. when it was settled with Jira Bewa who continued to possess it until the plaintiff took possession through Court in execution of a rent decree against Jira Bewa, and he alleges that immediately after having got possession through Court, he was dispossessed by the defendants. The defendants' case is that after Bhulu's death, Bhalu, another brother of his and other relations of Bhulu possessed the land and then settled it in barga with Kocha and that after possession for some years through Kocha they resumed khas possession and have all along been in possession since then. They say that the pl...
Siddeswar Ghose and anr. Vs. Panchanan Bangal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-03-1938
Reported in: AIR1938Cal390
Costello, J.1. This matter comes before us as an appeal under the provisions of Clause 15, Letters Patent of this Court. The matter came before Mukherjea J. on 22nd April 1937, and he then allowed an appeal against the decision of the Subordinate Judge, third Court, 24 Parganas dated 23rd March 1936. That decision itself was given in appeal against an order of the Munsif, first Court, Barasat, dated 19th December 1935, described as having been given in Miscellaneous Case No. 250 of 1935. This ease has a long history. It started by a suit instituted in the year 1925 brought to recover a sum of money said to be due by way of rent in respect of a certain holding. The amount claimed was very considerably less than the sum of Rs. 500. We are told that it was in the neighbourhood of Rs. 150 only. Litigation has been proceeding in respect of that small sum of money over a course of a dozen years or more. A decree in favour of the plaintiff in the suit was made on 22nd March 1926. The decree-h...
Kerr and Co. Vs. Ahmedabad Cotton Manufacturing and Calico Printing Co ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-03-1938
Reported in: AIR1938Cal458
ORDERPanckridge, J.1. In my opinion this is a borderline case in which I should not be justified in making an interlocutory injunction upon the materials disclosed in the affidavits. Although there is considerable similarity in the colour scheme of the two spools and the labels upon them, yet the business names of the plaintiff company and defendant 1 are indicated on the spools and also the initials, which I may say have no letter in common, under which the cotton is sold. In addition to this the plaintiff's cotton is shown to be manufactured at Paisley, and defendant 1's cotton at Ahmedabad. Defendant 1 suggests that his cotton is known as swadeshi cotton, and this fact is emphasized when a customer purchases their goods. I am not at present in a position to say how far this suggestion is substantiated or if it has any effect on the rights of the parties but in the absence of evidence of any actual cases in which the defendant's cotton has been sold to persons desiring to purchase th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›