Kolkata Court February 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.
ismail Bhai Rahim and ors. Vs. Adam Osman and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-23-1938
Reported in: AIR1939Cal131
Panckridge, J.1. This case raises points of considerable interest, though the amount at stake, apart from the question of the costs of the litigation, is a trifling one. The plaintiffs are executor and executrix of the will of Ibrahim Alia Rukhea Rahim, deceased. On 11th May 1935, Rahim advanced a sum of Rs. 2500 to the defendants. The advance was covered by a hatchita, and the defendants promised to pay interest at the rate of 7 annas per cent, per month until realization. Rahim died on 4th July 1935. Before probate of his will was obtained, Bahim's widow instituted the present suit and the executor joined with her as co-plaintiff. At the date of the institution of the suit, that is to say on 5th May 1936, the interest on the advance amounted to Rs. 130-2-6. Accordingly the sum claimed was Rs. 2630-2-6 with interest and costs. In the written statement the defendants plead that the plaintiffs wrongfully refused to accept payment of the sum, which was properly due to them on several occ...
Nakul Chandra Polley Vs. Kalipada Ghosal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-23-1938
Reported in: AIR1939Cal163
S.K. Ghose, J.1. This is a Letters Patent appeal from the judgment of our learned brother McNair J. The plaintiffs brought a suit for declaration of their occupancy right in char lands. The matter in controversy now relates to a 1/3rd share of the holding which was originally owned by one Sahadeb. He executed an unregistered kobala in favour of the defendant-respondent on 25th April 1931 and a registered kobala in favour of plaintiff 1, the appellant before us, on 15th September 1933. The question now is whether the appellant shall have priority over the respondent whose claim is based on the previous unregistered kobala. The Munsif held in favour of the plaintiff and decreed the suit. On appeal, the Subordinate Judge held against the plaintiff and dismissed the suit with regard to that portion of the property which is covered by the previous kobala in favour of the defendant. In second appeal, McNair J. upheld the decision of the Subordinate Judge but allowed further appeal.2. The que...
C.A. Low and anr. Vs. H.V. Low and Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-22-1938
Reported in: AIR1938Cal578
Panckridge, J.1. The plaintiffs in this case are the executors of Mr. Henry Vales Low who died in the year 1926 and Mr. John Herbert Pattinson, described as residing at Srinagar in the State of Kashmir. Low and Pattinson carried on business for many years as H, V. Low and Co. and in the course of their business they became the lessees under a mining lease dated 28th November 1918 of a tract of coal land in the District of Birbhum. The lessor was one Mr. John Arthur Millar and the term of the lease was 999 years. The consideration for the lease was a salami of Rs. 25,000 and a covenant by the lessees to pay a minimum rent or royalty of Rs. 3000 a year payable quarterly. On 4th April 1919 Low and Pattinson agreed in writing to grant a sub-lease of the coal land to a company called the Aurrang Coal Co. Ltd. The term of the sublease was the unexpired residue of the term of the lease of 28th November 1918. The salami agreed upon was a sum of Rs. 2,50,000 of which Rs. 50,000 were payable in ...
Kazimaddi Sardar and ors. Vs. Makramali Molla and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-22-1938
Reported in: AIR1938Cal789
S.K. Ghose, J.1. The petitioners in this case, having lost in proceedings under Section 145, Criminal P.C., instituted three suits for declaration of title to and possession of certain char lands. The suits were registered on 3rd October 1931. On 22nd April 1932 the petitioners applied for local investigation which was held by a commissioner and he submitted his report about two years later. The suits were then fixed for hearing on 26th April 1934. Thereafter adjournments took place on the ground of the Court being engaged in Sessions. Mean-while, the petitioners applied for summons on witnesses who were residing at various places. On 6th August 1934 the petitioners and some of their witnesses filed certain documents to be used as evidence in the cases. On that date the petitioners applied for time and the suits were adjourned to 4th September 1934. Meanwhile on 24th June 1934 the petitioners' pleader died and a new pleader was engaged. On 22nd August 1934 the suits were transferred to...
Sm. Lilabati Dasi, Widow of Hari Mohan Ghose and ors. Vs. Chitpore Gol ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-22-1938
Reported in: AIR1938Cal481
Edgley, J.1. These appeals arise with reference to a series of oases which were instituted by the plaintiffs for the purposes of correcting certain entries in the Record of Rights in which the plaintiffs had been described as settled raiyats in respect of their holdings. The plaintiffs claim that they are raiyats of the holdings at a fixed rate of rent. Seven of these cases were instituted by the Chitpore Golabari Company Ltd. who according to their case acquired their interest in the disputed tenancies by virtue of their purchase of these holdings in 1919. The plaintiffs in the other two suits are tenants whose interests were transferred to the Chitpore Golabari Company after the institution of the suits in question. The defendants were the landlords of the holdings in respect of which these suits were instituted and their contention is that the plaintiffs are ordinary settled raiyats and they maintain that it has not been established that they were tenants of the holdings at a fixed ...
Ebadi Khan and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-21-1938
Reported in: AIR1938Cal460
M.C. Ghose, J. 1. This is an appeal by three men who have been convicted under Sections 366, 342 and 457, I.P.C. and sentenced in all to rigorous imprisonment for four years and three months each. The prosecution case is that in the night of 26th March 1937, Lakmi Moni Dasi, a young woman, P. W. 5, was sleeping in a hut in her father's house. Her brother Nilmony Roy, P. W. 1, a youth of 18 was sleeping on the outer verandah. The door of the hut in which the young woman slept was locked from outside. Her parents had gone away to attend a feast in another place. At about 1 A. M., she woke up when some body was tying her mouth. She raised an alarm and cried out but the three appellants took her out of a window, 18' x 18', which they had opened out. They dragged her out of the room, took her to a field and there they ravished her one after the other, and they took her to a house where a niece of one of the appellants guarded her. She was there till 4 P. M. the next afternoon when the polic...
Kanailal Banerjee Vs. Satyabati Devi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-21-1938
Reported in: AIR1939Cal265
Nasim Ali, J.1. This is an application in revision under Section 115, Civil P.C., by the defendant in a suit for rectification of a certain solenama filed in a partition suit between the parties against the order of the Second Court of the Munsif of Howrah dated 16th August 1937 whereby the learned Munsif has rejected the defendant's objection that the suit has not been properly valued for the purposes of jurisdiction and court-fees. It is conceded by the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the suit in question comes under Section 7, Clause iv(c), Court-fees Act. In the partition suit the properties which were the subject-matter of partition were valued at Rs. 24,000rder A preliminary decree was made in that suit on the basis of a petition of compromise on 29th July 1935. Thereafter the plaintiff opposite party in this rule instituted a suit in the Second Court of the Munsif of Howrah for rectification of the said solenama upon which the preliminary decree was m...
Prafulla Chandra Nag Vs. Jatindra Nath Kar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-18-1938
Reported in: AIR1938Cal538
S.K. Ghose, J.1. This is an appeal under Clause 15, Letters Patent from the judgment of my learned brother Henderson J. The relevant facts are these: The plaintiff brought a suit alleging that he had agreed to construct a house for the defendant according to an estimated cost of Rs. 7555 less the sum of Rs. 555 claming Rs. 1776 as the amount due. The defendant con. tended that on account of the work being unsatisfactory, it had to be stopped after a certain time, that the total dues were settled at Rs. 4878 minus a rebate of Rs. 359 proportionate to the rebate of Rs. 555 upon the original estimate of Rs. 7555, that he made certain payments and that only Rs. 31 was due from him except with regard to some scaffolding materials. The Munsif decreed the suit at Rs. 531. On appeal by the defendant the Subordinate Judge reduced the figure to Rs. 480. The defendant again appealed to the High Court. Our learned brother Henderson J. agreed with the Subordinate Judge but allowed further appeal. H...
E.J. Williams and anr. Vs. Mahomed Suleman
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-18-1938
Reported in: AIR1938Cal587
McNair, J.1. Two plaintiffs, husband and wife, sue for damages due to a collision between the car of plaintiff 1 with a bus owned by the defendant on 10th March 1936. Plaintiff 2 was being driven in that car at the time of the accident and suffered serious injuries. The nature of those injuries has been spoken to by the doctor who has given evidence and the expenses incurred in connexion with those injuries are set out in para. 6 of the plaint. The actual sum claimed under that head was over Rs. 1300 but the vouchers have all been shown to the learned Counsel for the defendant and the parties are agreed that the damages under this head should be Rs. 1176.9-0. The ownership of the plaintiff's car though not admitted in the pleadings, has now been admitted, and it is not contested that the driver of the bus was an employee of the defendant and was driving in the regular course of his employment. It is the common case of both parties that the accident took place at the junction of Wellesl...
Mobarak Ali Shiak and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-18-1938
Reported in: AIR1939Cal252
Khundkar , J.1. This is an appeal by eleven persons against their convictions and sentences in a trial held by an Assistant Sessions Judge with the aid of a jury. They were found guilty of offences under the following Sections of the Penal Code : the appellant Mobarak Ali under Section 148 and the second part of Section 304; the appellant Oresh Ali under Sections 148 and 324, and the remaining appellants under Section 148.2. The case for the prosecution was that there had been a long standing feud between two parties, one headed by the appellant Mobarak Ali, and the other by one Khairuddin, and that in consequence of this an occurrence took place in which Mobarak Ali's party were the aggressors. It is alleged that early in the morning of 22nd December Khairuddin was sitting in his baithakkhana in company with the deceased Barshed, one Himmat Ali and. certain others, when the appellants came up armed with weapons which included spears. One Mohamed Ali, who was in the appellant's party, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »