Kolkata Court May 1941 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.
Debjani Biswas Vs. Rasik Lal Biswas
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-20-1941
Reported in: AIR1941Cal558
Derbyshire, C.J.1. This is a reference made to us by the learned Sessions Judge of the 24-Parganas. The facts are these: The married couple, Rasik Lal Biswas and his wife Debjani Biswas, had matrimonial differences and the wife brought proceedings against the husband in the Court of the second police Magistrate at Sealdah. There were two children of the marriage, both minors, a boy and a girl. Whilst the matter was in the Magistrate's Court the parties composed their differences and presented a petition of compromise under Section 488, Criminal P.C. That petition was as follows:The humble petition of both the parties, the opposite party Rashiklal Biswas and the petitioner Debjani Biswas for herself and her son Rabindra Nath Biswas minor and her daughter Kumari Amala Biswas also a minor, most respectfully sheweth:That the above matter has been amicably settled through the intervention of mutual friends on the following terms and conditions:(a) That the defendant Rashiklal Biswas shall p...
Syed Abbas Ali Vs. Nawab Abid Jahan
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-20-1941
Reported in: AIR1942Cal66a
ORDERAmeer Ali, J.1. The order which is sought by the receiver is upon a petition for directions originally moved before me on 5th April 1940. The prayer to the petition is to 'give directions for the settlement of the suit.' The application was made in the administration Syed Abbas v. Abid Jehan Begum : AIR1941Cal267 . The suit, the settlement of which was in question, was Suit No. 1950 of 1937, a suit brought by a lender to the late mutwalli against the receiver. On 24th April 1940, I gave a short judgment setting out what seemed to me the appropriate practice and directing the receiver to take the opinion of counsel. The petition was renewed on 22nd November 1940 with the opinion of counsel annexed. I then directed the receiver to take no action except upon a definite proposal of settlement. Such proposal has now been made by the plaintiff in the shape of an offer to accept a payment of Rs. 4200 on what is called an ex gratia basis--no order as to costs. The case, I am told, lasted ...
Nawab Syed Mahammad Hashim Ali Khan and anr. Vs. Iffat Ara Hamidi Begu ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-20-1941
Reported in: AIR1942Cal180
R.C. Mitter, J.1. Prince Qamar Qadar Mirza Mohammad Abed Ali Bahadur, hereafter called the Prince, a muslim governed by the Shia law died on 3lst January 1919 leaving him surviving his wife Shah Banu Amir Begum, a son Mirza Mohammad Syed Ali and a daughter, Nawab Zinat Ara Zinab Begum alias Juhi Begum as his heirs. His widow, Amir Begum died in 1928 leaving her son Mirza Mohammad Syed Ali and her daughter Juhi Begum as her heirs. The Prince in his old age was infatuated with a mistress of his named Shaheba Khatoon in whose favour he executed a lease for a term of ten years on 12th July 1916.. That lease comprised twenty eight items of immovable property in the suburbs of Calcutta but mostly within the local limits of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation. By its terms Shaheba Khatoon undertook to pay the Prince a clear sum of Es. 500 as rent per month. This lease was in supersession of an earlier lease which the Prince had executed in her favour for the selfsame properties under which Rs....
Fanindra Nath Dutta and ors. Vs. Satya Charan De and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-19-1941
Reported in: AIR1941Cal632
1. This is an appeal against the judgment and decree of the first Court of the Subordinate Judge at Midnapore dated 21st March 1938, in a suit to recover khas possession of half share of four C. S. plots, 1421, 1421/2040, 1422 and 1423 of Mahalla Bibigunj in Midnapur town or in the alternative for partition of the half share and for certain other reliefs. Plaintiffs' case briefly stated is as follows: The disputed four plots and three adjoining O. S. Plots, viz., 1418 to 1420 form one block of land measuring six cottas in area. Half share of this block of land belonged to Nemani Chand Maity, Nabadwip Maity and Mahendra Maity and the other half share belonged to one Mohesh Chandra Mallick, father of defendants 15 to 18. Nemai Chand, Nabadwip and Mohendra sold their half share of this block of land to Hem Gopal Dutt, the maternal uncle of the plaintiffs on 3rd October 1904. Hem Gopal died in 1313 B.S. (1906) without any issue. His widow Charubala Dasi inherited his properties. In the yea...
Romesh Chandra Bhaduri Vs. Jnanada Prosanna Bhaduri and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-19-1941
Reported in: AIR1942Cal39
Roxburgh, J.1. This appeal arises out of a refusal by the second Subordinate Judge of Pabna to reopen a decree in a mortgage suit on application being made to him under Section 36, Bengal Money Lenders Act, 1940. The borrower took a loan of Rs. 6000 on a simple mortgage bond on 15th July 1929. The lender sued for his dues by a suit brought in March 1937. Though the interest then due amounted to some Rs. 3300 in all, so that his claim might have been laid at Rs. 9300 the lender gave up some part of his claim for interest, reducing his total claim to Rs. 8000. A preliminary decree was passed on 23rd March 1938, fixing 24th September 1938, as the date for payment, and the amount at Rs. 9867-9-6, being made up as follows:Claim Rs. 8000Interest on the principal Rs. 1400Costs Rs. 823-9-6 _______________ Total Rs. 9867-9-6.2. The interest pendente lite amounting to Rs. 1044 was thus calculated at 12 per cent. per annum for a period of 17 1/3 months. Final decree was passed on 26th October 193...
Rajjab Ali Khan and ors. Vs. Bhupatish Chandra Roy Chudhury and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-1941
Reported in: AIR1942Cal61
B.K. Mukherjea, J.1. This appeal is on behalf of the defendants and it arises out of a suit commenced by the plaintiff for recovery of possession of the lands in suit on establishment of his title to the same. The lands in dispute consist of several C.S. plots situated partly in Mouza Goaldi and partly in Mouza Paikandi and they formerly be-longed to one Edon Molla who held them as an occupancy raiyat under two sets of landlords. The plaintiff Mahendra had 8 anna share in the superior interest, while the remaining 8 anna share belonged to Dakshina and Ramesh. In 1920 Mahendra instituted a rent suit against Edon Molla making his cosharers parties defendants. The suit was decreed and in execution of the same the holding was put up to sale and purchased by Mahendra himself on 20th July 1923. He obtained symbolical possession on 6th June 1926 but when he attempted to take actual possession of the lands he was resisted by the defendants which led to the institution of the present suit.2. Th...
Official Trustee of Bengal, Receiver to Estate of Rai Ishan Chandra Mi ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-1941
Reported in: AIR1942Cal222
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of arrears of rent of a patni. This patni was held by late Rai Iswar Chandra Mitra Bahadur under the Maharajadhiraj of Burdwan at an annual rent of Rs. 13,008. The Official Trustee of Bengal is the receiver to the estate of the said Rai Bahadur. The patni in suit was sold under the Bengal Patni Taluk Regulation (Bengal Regulation, 8 of 1819) for arrears of 1339 B.S. (1932-33) on 1st Jaista 1340 B.S. (15th May 1933) and was purchased by one Haridas Roy. On 14th May 1934 the Patni-dars instituted a suit in the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Hooghly (Title Suit No. 41 of 1934/60 of 1935) for setting aside this sale. On 1st Jaista 1345 B.S. (16th May 1936) the patni was again sold for arrears of 1342 B.S. and was purchased by Sm. Kamala Devi for Rs. 9930-14-6. The Subordinate Judge of Hooghly by his judgment in Title Suit No. 60 of 1935 dated 1st June 1936 set aside the sale of the patni at which Haridas Roy purchased the patni and direct...
Saradindu Sekhar Bannerjee Vs. Lalit Mohan Mazumdar and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-15-1941
Reported in: AIR1941Cal538
1. This is an appeal by the defendant in a suit to enforce an instalment bond dated 29th Falgoon 1342 B.S. The consideration of the bond in suit is the balance of the purchase money due from the defendant to the plaintiff on account of the purchase by the defendant from the plaintiff of certain zamindari, patni and darpatni properties. The money secured by the bond is stated in the bond to be payable in two instalments in the year 1342, one in the month of Asar and the other in the month of Aswin. Plaintiff's case is that the agreement was that the money would be repaid in two instalments in the year 1343 B.S., but through mistake of the scribe instead of the year 1343 B.S. 1342 B.S. was written in the bond, The defendant admits that the scribe made a mistake but his case is that the agreement was that he would repay in two instalments in the year 1346 B.S. The learned Judge has accepted the plaintiff's case. The evidence of P. W. 1 and P. W. 2 supports the finding of the Judge. The le...
Hugh Francis Bellgard and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-15-1941
Reported in: AIR1941Cal707
1. The appellants before us were tried by the Assistant Sessions Judge of Rajshahi and a common jury. Nine charges were framed against each of the two appellants. Against the appellant Bellgard were framed three separate charges of cheating punishable under Section 420, Penal Code, three separate charges of forgery punishable under Section 467, Penal Code, and three separate charges of falsification of accounts punishable under Section 477A, Penal Code. Against the appellant Missir were framed three separate charges of cheating punishable under Section 420, Penal Code, three separate charges of abetment of forgery punishable under Section 467, read with Section 109, Penal Code, and three separate charges of abetment of falsification of accounts punishable under Section 477A, Penal Code. The jury returned a unanimous verdict of not guilty in respect of the three charges of forgery against Bellgard and in respect of the three charges of abetment of forgery against Missir; but they return...
Sukumar Deb Roy and anr. Vs. Parbati Bala W/O Bidhuranjan Majumdar and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-1941
Reported in: AIR1941Cal663
ORDER1. This rule is directed against an appellate order dated 31st July 1940, made by the District Judge of Faridpur in a proceeding to obtain a succession certificate. The material facts are not in controversy and they may be stated as follows: One Mrinalini Mitter got certain money and securities in absolute right under the will of her husband Ramgobinda. Mrinalini died on 11th September 1926, leaving behind her her two married daughters Saraju Bala and Suniti Bala and four unmarried daughters to wit, Parbati, Malati, Kamala and Sabitri. It is not disputed that the properties which. she got under her husband's will constituted her Ajoutuka Stridhana, and they devolved' after her death upon her four unmarried daughters. Sabitri, the youngest daughter, died unmarried on 29th May 1934. The other three maiden daughters had been married in the meantime, and in February 1935, Kamala who got one-third share in her mother's estate presented an application before the Court of the Subordinate...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »