Kolkata Court July 1939 Judgments
Nathmull Bhuturia Vs. Golam Jabbar Mia Mutwalli Kulpara Jabed Musjid
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-31-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal273
Nasim Ali, J.1. The petitioner filed a plaint for recovery of Rs. 4773- 6-0 as arrears of rent from the opposite party in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Bajshahi on 17th April 1939. This plaint was not sufficiently stamped. The Judge however ordered the plaint to be registered and directed the petitioner to put in the deficit court-fee on or before 25th April 1939. On this last mentioned date the petitioner applied for an extension of time for filing the deficit court-fee and the Judge allowed him time till 2nd May 1939. On 29th April 1939, a notice under Section 34, Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act, from the Haragram Debt Settlement Board was received by the Judge. On 2nd May 1939, the Judge heard the pleader of the petitioner on the question as to whether further proceedings should be stayed in view of the notice under Section 34, Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act. On 8th May 1939, She Judge held that by the operation of the notice under Section 34, Bengal Agricultural Debtors Ac...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Kahar Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-27-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal182
Khundkar, J.1. This is a rule calling upon the District Magistrate of the 24 - Parganas to show cause why the conviction of and sentence passed upon the petitioner should not be set aside. The petitioner was convicted under Section 379, I.P.C., for having stolen a necklace from a small girl, who is prosecution witness No. 1. An appeal by the petitioner against his conviction was dismissed by a First Class Magistrate. The rule is confined to three grounds which are as follows : (1) that the trial has been vitiated by the admission of inadmissible evidence, namely the identification, before the investigating officer which forms the main basis of the judgments of both the Courts; (2) for that the trial is vitiated by the admission of testimony on oath or otherwise of little children who themselves admitted that they did not know the difference between truth and falsehood; (3) for that in view of the age and antecedents of the petitioner the sentence is much too severe. The case for the pr...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. W. Waugh Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-26-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal59
ORDERHenderson, J.1. This is a Rule calling upon the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta, to show cause why the conviction of the petitioner under Sections 352 and 504, I.P.C. should not be set aside. The parties live in two flats in the same house and apparently, as so frequently happens, they find it difficult to get on with each other. At any rate it appears that there was a violent quarrel between them on the day of occurrence. Both sides brought cases of mutual assault and they were both tried by Mr. H.K. De, Fourth Presidency Magistrate. Bach side, if their own version is to be accepted, did nothing at all and was merely the victim of an assault. It seems reasonably clear however that both sides lost their temper and probably said and did things which they now probably regret. The case brought by the present petitioner ended in acquittal while the petitioner was convicted. The judgment is almost unintelligible and it was necessary for Mr. Basu to show me the evidence before I c...
Tag this Judgment!Srikissen Khanna and ors. Vs. Tarachand Ghanashyamdas
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-25-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal228
Panckridge, J.1. This is a suit by four plaintiffs, who claim to be the present trustees of a deed of trust executed by a widowed lady named Gangadai on 22nd December 1897. The first defendants are a firm of merchants carrying on business at 18 Mullick Street, Calcutta, and they are also the tenants of 10 Rupchand Roy Street and 160 Harrison Road, Calcutta, in virtue of a lease in their favour executed by defendant 2, Amarnath Khanna, on 8th February 1910. Defendant 2 was at the time that the lease was granted by him the trustee under the deed of December 1897. He continued to occupy that position until 30th September 1931, when purporting to exercise a power of appointment in that behalf contained in the deed he executed an instrument appointing the plaintiffs, who are his sons, trustees in his place and stead. The prior history of the property in suit is as follows : It was purchased by Gangadai as long ago as 1851. It is in dispute whether the property was purchased by her from her ...
Tag this Judgment!Fateh Chand Mahesri Vs. AkimuddIn Choudhury and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal265
1. These appeals by the decree-holder auction-purchaser are directed against the order of the learned Subordinate Judge of Jalpaiguri dated 2nd December 1938 by which he has set aside the sale. The appellant sued his mortgagor and the puisne mortgagee. He got the preliminary decree on 25th August 1932 and the final decree on 6th March 1933. Thereafter there were some proceedings between the parties in an earlier execution started in the year 1933. These are not material to these appeals. On 8th September 1936 the relevant execution proceeding was started by the appellant (O.C. Execution Case No. 52 of 1936). In this execution the appellant wanted to sell the mortgaged properties which consisted of about 65 hals of land in the Alipur Dears. They were divided into seven lots. The first six lots comprised khas agricultural lands and the seventh lot an extensive waste, intended to be brought under tea cultivation but which could not and even now cannot be planted with tea shrubs on account...
Tag this Judgment!A.K. Macdonald Vs. A.M. Wilson
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal354
ORDERPanckridge, J.1. This is an originating summons taken out by Mrs. Anne Kerr Macdonald, the widow of one Robert Hampton Macdonald, who died at Harrogate, England, in 1922, leaving a will dated 8th March 1920. The testator was domiciled in Scotland, and in the concluding passages of his will he declares that it should be construed and given effect to according to the law of that country. By the will the testator appointed' the plaintiff a trustee in conjunction with three other persons, the defendant, Alexander Maurice Wilson, who is described as an advocate residing at Aberdeen, the defendant, Erskine Macdonald Aird residing at Glasgow, and the defendant, Robin Hamption Erskine Aird, described as a tea planter of Rupai Estate, Doom Dooma, Upper Assam. The testator, after directing payment of his debts and funeral expenses, and after giving certain pecuniary legacies, directed the trustees to hold his estate in trust for payment to the plaintiff, should she survive the testator, of ...
Tag this Judgment!Kishori Mohan Banik and ors. Vs. Maijannessa Bibi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Cal719
ORDERHenderson, J.1. This Rule raises questions regarding the interpretation of Section 26-G, Ben. Ten. Act, and the powers of this Court to interfere in revision under Section 115, Civil P.C. I have little doubt, as I have said once before, that the intention of the Legislature was to provide a cheap and expeditious remedy in cases where there is no real dispute as to the nature of the document. The right to make an application assumes that there is in existence a usufructuary mortgage. If the intention of the Legislature was that this question should be finally decided in summary proceedings of this nature, one would expect that there would be some provision providing an appeal and that Revenue Officers would not be empowered at all. Whatever however the intention might have been, it is necessary to examine the effect of the language actually used in the Section The important words are these:2. Sub-section 5:The mortgagor shall thereupon become entitled to possession of the mortgaged...
Tag this Judgment!Dewan Aptabur Roja Choudhury and ors. Vs. Tara Prasanna Roy Barman and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-20-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal185
Roxburgh, J.1. The plaintiff Tara Prasanna Roy Barman sued for a declaration of his title to the lands in Schedule 1 of the plaint and for possession on partition. He alleged that the lards which were situated in Mouza Tegharia belong to three taluks, being Nos. 1, 2 and 3, in equal shares, and that his father Ram Tarak obtained a patni lease in 1300 B. Section of the interest of Hoormatjan Bibi, who was the 16 annas owner of taluks Nos. 1 and 2, and had a one-third share in taluk No. 3 along with the Jalsuka and Mallikpore Estates who had the remaining shares. By mistake the lands were described in the patni as appertaining to taluk No. 10 of Nijgaon, but nothing now turns on this error. Ram Tarak who was the local sub-registrar constructed a basha on the lands of Schedule 2 (part of Schedule 1) and brought some of the remaining land under cultivation through tenants. Soon after the patni, however, he was transferred and the earthquake of 1304 B.S. occurred, so that the basha fell int...
Tag this Judgment!Kumar Narendra Nath Roy Vs. Midnapore Zamindary Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-19-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal115
R.C. Mitter, J.1. Appeal No. 203 is in Title Suit No. 45 of 1936 of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Nadia, a suit instituted by the plaintiff-appellant against the Midnapore Zemindary Co. Ltd., for recovery of khas possession of lands described in four schedules annexed to the plaint and for mesne profits. Appeal No. 204 is in Title Suit No. 46 of 1936, a suit of a similar scope against Manindra Nath Bose in respect of the lands described in the schedule annexed to the plaint. Touzi No. 491 of the Nadia Collectorate, Lot Sadipore, belonged to a number of proprietors who had opened separate accounts under Section 10, Bengal Land Eevenue Sales Act (11 of 1859). At the material point of time there were fifteen such separate1 accounts. Separate Account No. 491/7 (which was formerly numbered 491/5) belonged to one Bhupendra Nath Mustafi and separate account No. 491/13 stood in the name of Panchanan Mondal.2. On 7th January 1927, Bhupendra borrowed Rs. 4000 from the plaintiff-appellant...
Tag this Judgment!Chatra Serampore Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. Vs. Bijay Krishna De ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-19-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal162
Sen, J.1. This appeal is by the Chatra Serampur Co-operative Credit Society Ltd., which was the principal defendant in-a suit brought by Bejoy Krishna De and1 others. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court but on appeal it was decreed. The-facts giving rise to the present appeal may be briefly stated as follows : One Suprovab Addy borrowed money from the Chatra. Serampur Co-operative Society Ltd. which will hereafter be described as the Society. The two plaintiffs stood surety for the repayment of the money borrowed by Suprovat. Suprovat defaulted in paying the money. A dispute then arose between the Society on the one side and Suprovat and the two plaintiffs who are the sureties on the other regarding the repayment of this sum. This dispute was referred to the arbitration of one Batabyal under Sub-rule 2 of Rule 22, Cooperative Societies Act. Batabyal made an award against Suprovat and the two sureties. From this award, an appeal was taken to the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »