Kolkata Court March 1939 Judgments
Narsing Das Tansukdas Vs. Chogemull and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-31-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Cal435
Derbyshire, C.J.1. This is an appeal from a decision of Panckridge, J. given on 14th December 1937, whereby he held that part of a consent decree of this High Court was barred from execution by reason of the provisions of Sections 34 and 35, Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act, 1935. The decree in question was in Suit No. 1051 of 1935 and was dated 20th December 1935; it provided for the payment of Rs. 52,000 with interest in certain instalments, and the charging of certain properties set out in the schedule for the payment of the said decretal amount. The plaintiffs are a registered firm carrying on a business as commission agents at No. 9, Armenian Street, Calcutta. The defendants are members of a joint Hindu family governed by the Mitakshara School and are said to be carrying on a coparcenary business in piece-goods at Jalpaiguri, Bengal, under the name and style of Sewlal Momraj Agarwalla. Chogemull is described as the karta of the said Hindu family. The plaintiffs supplied the defenda...
Tag this Judgment!Gadadhar Mandal Vs. Gobinda Prosad Manna
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-31-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Cal458
ORDEREdgley, J.1. This Rule is directed against the order of the Munsif, Second Court, Contai, dated 11th February 1939, in which he rejected an application under Section 26-G, Ben. Ten. Act. The petitioner maintained that he had borrowed a sum of Rs. 650 by executing a usufructuary mortgage in favour of the opposite party on 16th May 1922. On 17th September 1938 he filed an application under Section 26-G(5) of the Act to be restored to possession of the mortgaged property and also for compensation on account of failure to restore the land to him or after the date of the expiry of the mortgage. The learned Munsif took the view that the mortgage deed did not create a complete usufructuary mortgage and that therefore the petitioner was not entitled to recover possession of the mortgaged property.2. A preliminary objection has been put forward in this case by the learned advocate for the opposite party to the effect that this application in revision is incompetent and he contends that the...
Tag this Judgment!Goberdhonedas and ors. Vs. Sm. Prafullabala Dasi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-31-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Cal637
Panckridge, J.1. This suit is concerned with the construction of the will of Dwarkanath Dey, a Hindu, who was the owner of landed properties in Calcutta of considerable value, and who died on 10th May 1911. He was survived by his widow, Golapmani, and by two widowed daughters, Sm. Sailabala and Sm. Nanibala, and also by a married daughter, Sm. Prafullabala, who is defendant 1 in these proceedings. The name of Prafullabala's husband was Bejoy Krishna Dutt and he died on 28th July 1936. Bejoy Krishna and Prafullabala had no children of their own, but on 30th April 1931, Bejoy had adopted a son who is now called Narain Chandra Dubt, and is defendant 2 in this suit. He has not yet attained the age of majority. Golapmani, the testator's widow, survived until 16th November 1937. The plaintiffs in this suit are the sons of Makan lal Das, whose mother, Shama Dasi, was the testator's sister. Makhanlal Das died on 12bh August 1924. Both of the plaintiffs were born during the lifetime of the test...
Tag this Judgment!Jogendra Krishna Banerji and ors. Vs. Administrator-general and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-29-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal87
S.K. Ghose, J.1. This is a second appeal by some of the defendants in a suit for recovery of drainage cess. The following facts are relevant to this appeal. R.S. 94 of 1932 was filed by a zamindar named Rani Harsamukhi in the Court of the Munsif at Baruipur on 15th April 1932 against the present defendants making the Administrator-General of Bengal as executor to a certain estate of the pro forma defendant. The claim was for cess under the Bengal Sanitary Drainage Act of 1895 for a period of four years before suit in respect of certain Mouzas in Touji 109 R.S. This plaint was returned and subsequently filed before the proper Court, namely the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Alipore. On 8th July 1932 the Administrator-General of Bengal was made a co-plaintiff on his application. He then put forward his own claim, namely cess for a period of 11 years in respect of two other mouzas not mentioned in the original plaint of Harshamukhi. The entire claim was decreed ex parte on 5th November 1...
Tag this Judgment!A.Z.M. Reazai Karim Vs. Mohammad Israil Ostagar and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-29-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Cal415
Derbyshire, C.J.1. The plaintiff agreed to build a house for the defendant at a certain figure and is now suing for the contract price. The defendant says that the work was not done according to the contract and has put in this plea:That this defendant is entitled to get damage from the plaintiff on account of the loss already sustained by him and the loss to which he will be put in future on account of the defective construction, negligence and carelessness as well as the mental agony, suffering and inconvenience that this defendant had to undergo on account of the acts and conduct of the plaintiff but as it is not possible to assess the exact amount of such damage and compensation at this stage, this defendant tentatively values such damages, loss and compensation at Rs. 100 and pays court-fees thereon and will pay further court-fee on such amount as will be assessed by this Court.2. The defendant on 19th December 1938, was ordered to put his own valuation on his claim as set out in ...
Tag this Judgment!Satish Chandra Das Gupta and ors. Vs. Bireswar Sur
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-28-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Cal465
Edgley, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order of Mr. P.C. De, District Judge, Bakarganj, dated 4th April 1938, whereby he reversed the decision of the Munsif, Third Court, Patuakhali. The learned Munsif was dealing with an application under Section 47, Civil P.C. which had been filed by the appellants Satish Chandra Das Gupta and others in Execution Case No. 1562 of 1932. Their contention was that the decree which was the subject-matter of the execution proceedings in the abovementioned case could not be executed against them on account of the fact that an attachment order dated 27th January 1932 should be deemed to have lapsed on account of the dismissal of a previous Execution Case No. 21 of 1931 on 22nd November 1932. The objection filed by the judgment-debtor was allowed by the trial Court, but the decision of the learned Munsif was set aside by the learned District Judge on appeal.2. The main facts with which we are con. cerned in this case are briefly as follows: A man n...
Tag this Judgment!Harimati Debi and anr. Vs. Anath Nath Roy Choudhury
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-27-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Cal535
R.C. Mitter, J.1. The appellants are the applicants for letters of administration. They have propounded a will said to have been executed by their father Phani Bhusan Roy Choudhury as far back as 27th February 1910. Phani Bhusan died on 6th March 1910 and the application for letters of administration with the will annexed was made on 15th September 1930, more than 20 years after the testator's death. The inordinate delay in propounding the will coupled with the fact that it is an unregistered one makes it our duty to scrutinize the evidence produced on behalf of the propounder with care and circumspection. Phani Bhusan was survived by his widow Mrinalini, two minor unmarried daughters, Harimati and Probhabati, who were about 13 and 10 years of age respectively at the time of his death and by an infant son, Bholanath then a few months old. Anath Nath, the respondent in the appeal, is the grandson of a separated brother of Phani Bhusan of the name of Apurba. The summary of the terms of t...
Tag this Judgment!Amulya Krishna Bandopadhyaya Vs. Raruli Pioneer Co-operative Bank Ltd. ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal150
B.K. Mukherjea, J.1. This appeal is on behalf of defendant 2 in a suit for redemption of a mortgage. The material facts which are not disputed may be shortly stated as follows : There is a putni taluk known as Banka Taluk in the District of Khulna which belonged to one Harish Chandra Roy. After the death of Harish, his executor who was the father of defendant 4 mortgaged the entire taluk to the Khulna Loan Co., who are defendant 1 in the present suit, on 22nd December 1922. On 31st March 1927 the plaintiff company obtained a mortgage of one-fourth share of the taluk from defendant 3 who was a co-sharer in the mortgaged property. Defendant 1 instituted a suit on their mortgage bond in 1921 and got a decree on 19th August 1930. The plaintiff, who as stated above, was a puisne mortgagee of a fourth share of the property was not made a party to that suit. Defendant 1 in execution of the mortgage decree put up the entire taluk to sale and purchased it themselves on 25th August 1933. They to...
Tag this Judgment!Suresh Chandra Sen Vs. Mahendra Nath Mukherjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Cal459
S.K. Ghose, J.1. This is a second appeal by the plaintiff in a suit for rent which has been dismissed by both the Courts below. There is a revenue-paying estate which has been described by the learned advocate for the appellant as Mai Touzi No. 37 of the Hooghly Collectorate. The revenue payable at the time of permanent settlement was Rupees 44,868-10-4 which amount was subsequently reduced by land acquisitions to Rupees 44,805-14-9. There is another touzi No. 2152 which has been described as Thanadari Chakran Touzi and the revenue payable in respect thereof is Rupees 369-6.9. Certain persons owned both these touzis and of these Raj Krishna Mukherjee had 12 annas 16 gds. share and Prananath Roy Choudhury had 1 anna 12 gds. share in both the touzis. Prananath gave an ijara lease to Eaj Krishna in res-pect of his 1 anna 12 gds. share by a document dated 22nd July 1865: vide Ex. 2. The present contesting defendants are the successors-in-interest of Eaj Krishna, who, according to the plain...
Tag this Judgment!Sm. Charubala Dei Vs. Baikuntha Nath Jana and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Cal419
ORDEREdgley, J.1. This Rule is directed against the order of the learned District Judge of Midnapore dated 20th August 1938 under which he dismissed summarily an order made by the Munsif of Danton on 13th July 1938 by which a certain execution sale was set aside. The material facts with which we are' concerned in the present case are briefly as follows: On 14th August 1934, a decree was obtained by opposite parties Nos. 3 and 4 against Sm. Hema Bewa, opposite party No. 9. The decree in question was not only in favour of the opposite parties, Nos. 3 and 4 but it also operated in favour of their co-sharers, opposite parties Nos. 5 to 8. It appears however, that on 12th September 1934, opposite parties Nos. 3 and 4 purchased the interest of their co-sharersand by reason of this transfer the entire interest of opposite parties Nos. 5 to 8 in respect of the decree, which had been passed on 14th August 1934, passed to opposite parties Nos. 3 and 4. On 3rd April 1935 opposite parties Nos. 3 a...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »