Kolkata Court August 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.
Kissenlal Malpani, Administrator to Estate of Jethmal Malpani and Firm ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-21-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal24
Roxburgh, J.1. The plaintiff Kissenlai Malpani sued the defendant in respect of money due on a promissory note, Ex. 7, said to have been given in lieu of an earlier promissory note Ex. 6, in favour of his brother Jethmal Malpani. Jethmal had had a separate business and had lent the money on Ex. 6 in the course of this business. He died on 4th March 1933, leaving two daughters as his heirs. After his death the; business was run by the brothers of Jethmal under the name and style of 'Jethmal Kaniram', and in the course of such business one brother, Kaniram, took the renewed hand note Ex. 7. It appears that the brothers were at one time contending that Jethmal's business was a joint family business, but when they endeavoured to sue debtors on this basis they failed, and henca Kissen Lai obtained ex parte letters of administration to the estate of Jethmal and he has now instituted this suit as (a) holder of letters of administration in respect of the estate of the deceased Jethmal Malpani,...
K.K. Das, Receiver and ors. Vs. Sm. Amina Khatun Bibi and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-21-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal356
1. Kazi Abdul Aziz (defendant 3) borrowed sums of money from Radha Bullav Saha (defendant 1), on different occasions from 24th April to 17th October 1928. The said defendant 1 brought a suit in 1931 to recover the same and got a decree for Rs. 3129 odd on 6th May 1932. Kazi Abdul Aziz had a running business with Shaikh Muhammad Hanif (defendant 2). The accounts were twice adjusted: once on 13th April 1931, when Rs. 1907 odd was found due from the former to the latter, and again on 17th October 1931 when a sum of Rs. 2304 odd was similarly found due. For both these amounts Abdul Aziz executed hatchittas in favour of Muhamed Hanif. Transactions between them however continued on till 5th April 1932. On that date the former was in debt to the latter to the extent of Rs. 2076 odd. The latter brought a suit and recovered a decree for the same on 10th March 1933. These two decree-holders executed their decrees and attached some properties as belonging to their judgment-debtor. The plaintiff-a...
Debendra Chandra De and ors. Vs. Jamini Kumar Dey and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-21-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Cal744
Henderson, J.1. This appeal is by the plaintiffs. They instituted the suit in order to recover possession of certain land. Their tenant, one Nishi, the predecessor of defendants 3 to 6, had a raiyati holding. He sold it to one Chittaranjan De. The plaintiffs thereupon applied for pre-emption under the provisions of Section 26.F, Bengal Tenancy Act. The application was allowed and they took delivery of possession through the Court. They were unable however to obtain actual possession through the obstruction of defendant 1. They accordingly instituted the present suit. Defendant 1 contends that he has an under-raiyati which was created previous to the pre-emption. The Munsif gave the plaintiffs a decree, but this decree was reversed by the Subordinate Judge in appeal. Two points arise for decision (1) whether the proceedings by which the plaintiffs exercised their right of pre-emption under Section 26-F, Ben. Ten. Act, were void, (2) whether defendant 1 was entitled to resist the plainti...
Sm. Bhuban Mohini Debi and anr. Vs. Biraj Mohan Ghosh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-18-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal1
1. This appeal is on behalf of the plaintiffs and the suit was one commenced by them for establishment of their title to the lands in suit and for recovery of khas possession on evicting defendant 1. There was a claim for mesne profits against both the defendants and an alternative claim for rent in case defendant 1 succeeded in establishing his tenancy right to the disputed land. The plaintiffs' case was that the lands in suit appertained to the secular estate of one Rajmohan Nag Choudhury which vested in the predecessor of the plaintiffs under a sale in execution of a mortgage decree. Defendant 1 was a tenant in occupation of the said lands, but in a rent suit which was instituted against him by the plaintiffs he denied their title and set up a tenancy right under the debuttar estate of Raj Mohan Nag Choudhury which admittedly did not pass to the plaintiffs' predecessor by the mortgage sale and which is now in possession of defendant 2 as a receiver appointed by the Court.2. This ple...
Mohanta Ramdas Aulia Vs. Bazley Karim Fazlay Moula and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-18-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal83
Henderson, J.1. This appeal is by the plaintiff who is the zamindar. The suit was instituted to recover the rent due on a certain putni which belonged originally to one Nurul Huq, who is the father of defendant 2 and husband of defendant 3. Defendant 1 was also impleaded on the ground that she had obtained a transfer from defendant 2. The suit was contested by defendant 2 on the ground that he was relieved of all liability by his transfer in favour of defendant 1. The document was not produced and the evidence adduced on behalf of defendant 2 was discrepant. It is apparently not certain whether the transfer was a sale or heba-bil-ewaj. The learned Munsif held that there was no evidence to prove that the transfer had been recognized. This finding was reversed by the learned District Judge.2. Now, the contesting defendant made no attempt to prove that the transfer fee had been paid or security tendered and accepted. He consented himself with relying upon statements made in the plaint. Th...
Sushil Kumar Ghatak Vs. Satya Gopal Chatterjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-18-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal329
ORDER1. The only point for determination in this rule is whether a purchaser by a private treaty from a judgment-debtor after sale of an agricultural holding under Chap. 14, Ben. Ten. Act, is entitled to gets the sale set aside under Section 174, Clause (1) of that Act. That clause is in these terms:Rules 89 and 90 of Order 21 in Schedule 1 to the Civil P.C., 1908, shall not apply in cases where a tenure or holding has been sold for arrears of rent due thereon, but in such cases the judgment-debtor, or any person whose interests are affected by the sale, may at any time within 30 days from the date of the sale, apply to the Court to set aside the sale, on his depositing-(a) for payment to the decree-holder the amount recoverable under the decree up to the date when the deposit is made with costs; and(b) for payment to the auction-purchaser, as penalty, a sum equal to five per cent, of the purchase money, but not less than one Rupee.2. The contention of the petitioner is that a person w...
Saiyed Abdul Jabbar and anr. Vs. Jitendra Kumar Pal Chaudhury and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-17-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal77
1. This appeal by two of the defendants is directed against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge, First Court, Sylhet, dated 14th August 1937. The suit was instituted by nine plaintiffs to set aside a revenue sale held on 23rd January 1934, in the alternative for a reconveyance of the plaintiffs' share from defendants 6 and 7. The learned Subordinate Judge has granted the first prayer. Mehal Syed Muhamed Nazir, hisya taluk, Md. Batir, bearing Touzi No. 54721/1 of the Sylhet Collectorate, is a permanently settled estate with a total annual revenue of Rs. 3152-3-0. The total local rate payable at the material time was Rs. 754-11-7. The proprietors of the said mehal had opened separate accounts under the provisions of Section 65 of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation (1 of 1886). Before September 1933, thirteen separate accounts had been opened, the first seven in respect of aliquot shares of the mehal and the remaining six in respect of specific lands of the same. With the ...
Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs Vs. L.N. Birla and an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Cal724
McNair, J.1. The Local Government has appealed against the discharge of L.N. Birla in a ease under Sections 60 (a)(iii), 32(a) and 24(1)(c), Factories Act, 1934, and Rule 46 of the Bengal Factories Rules, 1935. In the connected proceeding, Revision No. 599 of 1939, a Rule has been issued at the in. stance of the Local Government calling upon B.K. Rana to show cause why the order of conviction and sentence passed upon him under the same Sections of the Factories Act and the Factories Rules should not be set aside and such further or other order be made as to this Court may seem fit and proper. These cases are two out of six cases instituted by the Local Government against L.N. Birla for various alleged contraventions of the Factories Act and the rules made there under. The Keshoram Cotton Mills Ltd, is the occupier of the factory and L.N. Birla is admittedly one of the directors of that company. Proceedings have been instituted against Birla as the person responsible for the alleged off...
Abdul Latif Vs. Abdul Gani Serang
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Cal730
Nasim Ali, J.1. This rule is directed against the order of the Munsif at Sandwip, dated 17th March 1939, rejecting the defendant-petitioner's application for vacating his order, dated 5th April 1938, staying the hearing of a certain suit for foreclosure on the basis of a mortgage by conditional sale executed by him in favour of the plaintiff-opposite party. The only point for determination in this rule is whether a suit for foreclosure of a mortgage by conditional sale executed for the purpose of securing the payment of money advanced by way of loan is a suit in respect of a 'debt' within the meaning of Section 34, Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act, 1935. 'A mortgage' as defined in Section 58, T.P. Act,is the transfer of an interest in specific immovable property, for the purpose of securing the payment of money advanced or to be advanced by way of loan, an existing or future debt, or the performance of an engagement which may give rise to a pecuniary liability.2. A mortgage by condition...
Chatra-serampore Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. Vs. Gopal Chandra Mi ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-11-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Cal198
B.K. Mukherjea, J.1. This is an appeal on behalf of the Chatra Serampore Cooperative Society, which was the defendant in a suit commenced by the plaintiff for a declaration that an award made by an arbitrator appointed by the Assistant Registrar Co-operative Societies, under Rule 22 of the Rules framed by the Local Government under Section 43, Co-operative Societies Act was illegal, inoperative and ultra vires. There was also a prayer for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant Society from enforcing the award by execution against the plaintiff. It appears that one Osman Miya had borrowed a sum of Rs. 500 from the defendant Society, by executing a bond on 3rd January 1926. The defence ease was that the plaintiff stood one of the sureties for Osman Miya in the bond. There being default in payment of the instalments stipulated in the bond, the whole amount due under it became payable, and in 1933 a dispute was sent by the defendant to the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »