Kolkata Court July 1939 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.
Sarat Chandra Nag Vs. Rati Kanta Polley and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-06-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Cal711
Sen, J.1. The defendants are the members of an undivided family who possessed a dwelling house in which they resided. The plaintiff, who is a stranger to the family, acquired a share in this dwelling house and then brought this suit for partition. A decree for partition was made. Defendant 1 appealed from that decree and although there were other grounds taken in the memorandum of appeal the only question canvassed related to the right which defendant 1 claimed by virtue of the provisions of Section 4, Partition Act. Defendant 1 pointed out that the dwelling house belonged to an undivided family and that the plaintiff who was not a member of the family had acquired a share in that dwelling house. He contended that he was entitled as a member of the family to buy the share of the plaintiff. The plaintiff resisted the appeal on certain grounds of which two only fall for consideration in this Court. He contended first that the appeal had been filed without a copy of the judgment of the tr...
Wan Ten Lang Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-05-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal174
ORDERAmeer Ali, J.1. This is an application under Section 45, Specific Relief Act for an order upon the Customs Authorities to proceed under Section 32, Sea Customs Act. The questions are three, (1) whether the Court has any jurisdiction at all, a point of demurrer, (2) whether on a proper construction of the Act,, the Customs Authorities are refusing to perform a statutory duty; in other words, what if anything have the Customs Authorities done wrong? (3) Whether assuming jurisdiction, relief under Section 45, should be granted. The particular facts are as follows:The goods in question arrived on 17th February 1939. On the previous day, OB 16th February 1939 we find a bill of entry which is annexed to the affidavit in support of this application. It shows that the-consignment consisted of a number of miscellaneous goods. The amount or real value appears in the appropriate column inserted by the importer or his agent. At the bottom of the bill of entry is a printed note Clause 3 of whi...
Annda Prosad Talukdar and ors. Vs. Ramjan Sarkar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-04-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal6
Edgley, J.1. In the suit with reference to which this appeal arises the plaintiffs sought to eject the defendant, Ramjan Sarkar, from certain land. Their case was that a man Maniruddin was their tenant in respect of a holding with an area of 176 acres and that on 17th Aswin 1335 B.S. corresponding to 3rd October 1928, i.e., before the passing of the Bengal Tenancy Act of 1928, he transferred one acre of this holding to the defendant Ramjan Sarkar. Subsequently, after the passing of the Act of 1928, Maniruddin transferred 4he remainder of the holding to Kalipada Bhattacharjee. The transfer took place on -28th February 1934. The plaintiffs then applied for pre-emption of the portion of the holding which had been transferred to Kalipada Bhattacharjee and an order for pre-emption was duly made in their favour. 'Subsequently, on 10th January 1936, the plaintiffs instituted the suit out of which this appeal arises for the purpose of ejecting Ramjan Sarkar from that portion of the folding whi...
Kamakshya Prosad Dalal and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-04-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Cal657
Henderson, J.1. This is a rule calling upon the District Magistrate of Nadia to show cause why the conviction of petitioner 1 under Section 181, I. P.C., and that of petitioner 2 of the abetment thereof should not be set aside. One Nandi Gopal Dutta, uncle of the petitioner 2, insured his life in December 1934. He died in April 1935. In connexion with the claim, petitioner 1 swore a false affidavit about the age of the deceased before an Honorary Magistrate of Chuadanga. On receipt of an anonymous letter the suspicion of the company was aroused. A police investigation ensued and as a result petitioner 2 and an agent of the company were com. mitted to the Court of Session on a charge in connexion with the fraud; they were acquitted. This prosecution, amongst others, was started with regard to Offences which were alleged to have been committed in connexion with this false claim. The rule was granted on ground No. 1 attached to the petition which is in the following terms:For that the Cou...
Manmatha Pal Choudhury and ors. Vs. Sarada Prosad Nath and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-04-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Cal651
1. This appeal has been preferred by three of the judgment-debtors, namely Manmatha Pal Choudhury, Amiya Pal Choudhury and Ranjit Pal Choudhury, and is directed against an order of the Subordinate Judge of Nadia, dated 5th July 1938. A preliminary objection has been taken that no appeal lies against the order complained of. A rule however in the alternative was issued by this Court. In order to decide not only the question as to whether the appeal is competent or not, but also the appeal on the merits, the following facts are necessary.2. One Jagannath Khan and others, whom we shall hereafter call the Khans, took a loan of Rs. 1,80,000 from the Faridpur Loan Office in the year 1924. They executed a mortgage bond by which touzies Nos.336/6 and 441/6 of the Nadia Collectorate as also other properties were hypothecated. In 1931 the said Loan Office instituted a suit on their mortgage in the Original Side of this Court. A preliminary decree was passed on 9th July 1931 and the final decree ...
Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs Vs. Kshitish Chandra ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-04-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Cal667
Henderson, J.1. This is an appeal by the Local Government under Section 417, Criminal P.C., against an order of acquittal passed by the learned Sessions Judge of Jalpaiguri. The accused was convicted by a Magistrate of an offence punishable under Section 6 read with Section 21, Bengal Food Adulteration Act. The appellant has a shop in a bazar named Barnes in the District of Jalpaiguri. On 21st July 1938 the Assistant Health Officer purchased 12 ounces of mustard oil for the purpose of chemical analysis. In accordance with the procedure laid down under the rules the oil was placed in three bottles which were sealed, one of the bottles being made over to the accused. One bottle was sent to the analyst employed by the District Board. The accused's bottle was sent at his request to the Government Test House at Alipur to be analyzed. As a result of the analysis made by the analyst of the District Board, which showed that the oil was adulterated, the accused was put on his trial and convicte...
Radhashyam Choudhury and ors. Vs. Gourinath Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-03-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal9
Sen, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendants in a suit for rent. The plaintiffs sued four persons, namely, defendants 1 to 4, for rent. Defendants 1 to 3 are the Choudhurys and defendant 4 is Nagendra Nath Banerjee. The Choudhurys filed a written statement but Banerjee did not file any. The defence taken by the Choudhurys was inter alia that the plaintiffs did not sufficiently describe the land in the tenancy and therefore it offended against the provisions of Section 148-B, Ben. Ten. Act. On 3rd December 1935, the plaintiffs represented to the trial Court that they did not intend to prosecute the suit as against the Choudhurys. The suit was accordingly dismissed as against these, defendants with costs. As defendant 4 had not filed a written statement the suit was decreed as against defendant 4 ex parte. From this ex parte decree defendant 4 filed a motion in the Court of the District Judge on 23rd December 1935. It is now established that the Choudhury defendants, that is to say defe...
Murari Ram Dass Vs. Rasik Lal Bhadra and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-03-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal159
Edgley, J.1. The judgment-debtor 1 Murari Ram Das is the appellant in this case. It appears that the decree-holder obtained a final mortgage decree against the appellant on 5th December 1935. This decree was put into execution by the decree-holder on 3rd December 1936 in Execution Case No. 126 of 1936. These particular execution proceedings were dismissed for default on 7th April 1937, but a further application for execution was filed on 27th October 1937, and in his application the decree-holder asked that execution might be taken only in respect of some of the mortgaged properties which were covered by his decree. On an objection filed on behalf of the appellant the first Court directed that all the mortgaged properties should be included in the sale proclamation. An appeal was taken against this order 'to the lower Appellate Court and the learned Subordinate Judge directed that execution should proceed in respect of the properties mentioned in the decree-holder's application and dis...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›