Kolkata Court August 1942 Judgments
Kshetra Mohan Dass Vs. D. Basu C.A. Official Liquidator of East Bengal ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-28-1942
Reported in: AIR1943Cal105
R.C. Mitter, J.1. The appellant Kshetra Mohan Dass became the sole selling agent of the East Bengal Sugar Mills, Ltd., a company registered under the Companies Act. The contract of agency (EX. A) was signed on 6th October 1937, but it became operative from 28th October following. The agency was to be for a fixed period of four years. The first party to the contract was the company and the second party the agent, Kshetra Mohan Dass. It is not necessary to set out all the terms of the contract. Clauses 6, 14 and 15 to 17 are the only clauses relevant for the determination of the question raised in this appeal. We reproduce them but in a different order:15. For abiding by all the terms, etc., of this agreement and for the aforesaid sole agency business of sugar the second party keeps a security deposit with the first party for a period of tour years a sum of Rs. 10,500 carrying interest at the rate of 3 per cent, per annum. The first party shall pay to the second party, to his satisfactio...
Tag this Judgment!Fateh Chand Mahesri Vs. AkimuddIn Chaudhuri
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-28-1942
Reported in: AIR1943Cal108
R.C. Mitter, J.1. The respondent, Akimuddin Choudhury borrowed from the appellant Fateh Chand Rs. 7000 and as security for repayment of that loan executed a mortgage (EX. 1) in favour of the latter on 31st May 1921. The recital in the mortgage instrument is that he required the money for purchasing landed property (jotes). In fact he employed Rs. 6200 in purchasing landed property, namely shares iv Jote No. 491. Fateh Chand had a share in that jote (No. 491). So he and Akimuddin became cosharers in the same. The former instituted a suit for partition of the said jote. That suit ended in a compromise. By that compromise Akimuddin agreed to purchase Fateh Chand's share for Rs. 2000 and to pay him a further sum of Rs. 330 on account of mesne profits and costs of the suit. The conveyance was executed but Akimuddin could not pay in cash. Ostensibly for securing the said amount of Rs. 2330 he executed a mortgage (Ex. 2) in favour of the latter on 30th November 1925. The mortgage instrument p...
Tag this Judgment!Baraset Basirhat Light Railway Co., Ltd. Vs. Nrisingha Charan Nandi Ch ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-27-1942
Reported in: AIR1943Cal128
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for injunction. Plaintiff's case briefly stated is as follows: Plaintiff is the proprietor of touzi No. 566 of the 24-Parganas Collectorate. Mouza Khariberia appertains to this touzi. Through this mouza runs a natural navigable water course called Sunti Nadi or Haroa Khal (hereinafter referred to as the khal) north to south. Plaintiff has been in uninterrupted possession of the said khal by leasing out the jalkar and fishery right to various persons. In 1909-10, the defendant company acquired a portion of this khal comprised within C.S. Plot 1663 by a proceeding under the Land Acquisition Act for the purpose of constructing a bridge over that portion. To the south of the bridge plaintiff has a market comprised within C.S. Plot 1662. Country boats laden with merchandise used to ply from the northern and southern directions of the khal to this market. This yielded an income to the plaintiff in the shape of tolls and tolas paid by the boatmen. Some burr...
Tag this Judgment!Hiranya Bhusan Mukherjee and ors. Vs. Gouri Dutt Maharaj and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-27-1942
Reported in: AIR1943Cal227
Pal, J.1. This appeal is by defendant 4 and defendants 3(a) to 3(h) in a suit for sale in enforcement of a mortgage. The mortgage in question is dated 21st September 1932, on which date defendant 1 borrowed from the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 6000 and executed the mortgage bond in his favour agreeing to pay interest at the rate of 21 per cent. per annum. The bond is Ex. 1 in the suit and constitutes a simple mortgage. The property given in mortgage is defendant 1's interest in C. Section Plot No. 5820 of Khatian No. 1178 measuring 17 kattas 5 chattaks in area within the municipal town of Asansol together with pacca structures and the fixtures, etc., described in Schedule A to the plaint. It is a cinema house in the town of Asansol. The plot of land belongs to one Harihar Mukherjea and his co-sharers. Defendant 1 took lease of this land from him for the purpose of establishing a cinema house on it.2. The present suit was instituted on 8th July 1938. By that date, the mortgage money amounted...
Tag this Judgment!Jatis Chandra Pal Choudhury and ors. Vs. Kshirode Kumar Pramanick, Man ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-27-1942
Reported in: AIR1943Cal319
R.C. Mitter, J.1. One Umesh Chandra Pal Chowdhury was the proprietor of two revenue paying estates, Mahal Taraf Munshipur and Mahal Dihi Rajapore, which are numbered 336 and 441 in the register of the Collector of the District of Nadia. On 26th February 1848, he granted a patni taluk of the said estates to two brothers, Pran Krishna and Nobo Krishna Pal Chowdhury, in the benami of one Shambhu Chandra Sinha, reserving an annual rent of Rs. 26,001 which was payable in 12 monthly kists (Ex. QQQ n-29). In 1850 there was a partition between Pran Krishna and Nobo Kri. shna. The instrument of partition was executed on 1st February 1850 (Ex. 24, 11-43). At that partition Pran Krishna got 12 mouzas appertaining to Taraf Munshipur and seven mouzas of Dihi Rajapore as representing his 8 annas share in the aforesaid patni taluk, and Nobo Krishna got in his allotment the remaining mouzas, viz., 12 mouzas of Taraf Munshipur and ten mouzas of Dihi Rajapore. They agreed between them to pay the patni r...
Tag this Judgment!Khetai Molla Vs. Nityananda Sarkar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-25-1942
Reported in: AIR1944Cal263
R.C. Mitter, J.1. Defendant 1 borrowed a sum of Rs. 5999 from one Gopiballav Sarkar, the predecessor-in-ihterest of the plaintiffs on 20th April 1921. There was a stipulation to pay interest at the rate of 12 per cent, per annum to be compounded at the end of every year. As security for the loan, defendant 1 executed a mortgage in favour of the said Gopiballav Sarkar. Thereafter defendant 1 made three part payments on the three occasions and endorsed these payments on the back of the mortgage instrument. The last part payment which was endorsed on the back of the mortgage by him, was made on 21st May 1927. This suit has been filed on 16th November 1939, which is beyond 12 years of the date of the last payment. The claim has been laid at Rs.5999 only, the mortgagees having given up practically whole of their claim for interest. A question was raised in the lower Court to the effect that the suit was barred by limitation. That question was raised by the defendant on two grounds; the firs...
Tag this Judgment!Bamapada Ghosh Vs. Satish Chandra Sur
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-25-1942
Reported in: AIR1943Cal235
1. This appeal is against three orders of the District Judge of the 24-Parganas dated 26th January 1942, 2nd and 6th February 1942 in a proceeding for letters of administration with a copy of the will annexed to the estate of late Debrani Ghose. The respondent is the sole legatee under the will which is alleged to have been executed in French Chandernagore. He made an application to the District Judge of the 24-Parganas under section 228, Succession Act, for letters of administration. The appellant is the son of the step-son of the testatrix. He filed an objection to this application on 26th January 1942. On that day the learned Judge recorded the following order:Applicant's pleader says that the will having been proved in French India according to the law in force there, no objection can be entertained by this Court. Objector's pleader is not now present. Put up on 2nd February 1942 in his presence.2. On 2nd February 1942, the learned Judge recorded the following order:The objector's ...
Tag this Judgment!Nirode Barani Debya and anr. Vs. Sisir Kumar Mukherjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-1942
Reported in: AIR1942Cal616
ORDERHenderson, J.1. This rule has been obtained by the judgment-debtor and it is directed against an order rejecting her application under Section 86(b), Bengal Money-Lenders Act. Unfortunately it is not possible for me to make a final order here. There is no longer any dispute as to the facts. The original debt was incurred by the petitioners' husband and father. It was for Rs. 90 and represented the balance of the purchase money due by him to the decree-holder on the sale of land. The purchase money was discharged partly in cash and partly by a hand-note; This hand-note was renewed by another hand-note in the year 1928. This hand-note in its turn was renewed by another hand-note executed by the petitioners themselves and is the basis for the present claim. The contention of the opposite party was that the hand-note was not a loan within the meaning of the Act. He relied on the decision in Saradindu Sekhar Banerjee v. Lalit Mohan Mazumdar : AIR1941Cal538 . The learned Judges there ha...
Tag this Judgment!Baidyanath Nandi S/O Trailakhya Nath Nandi and ors. Vs. Shyama Sundar ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-19-1942
Reported in: AIR1943Cal427
B.K. Mukherjea, J.1. These two rules are directed against certain orders of the Subordinate Judge, First Court, 24-Parga-nas, made in Title Suit No. 53 of 1940 pending before him by which permission was refused to the petitioners, who are some of the plaintiffs in that suit, to withdraw from it and to have their names struck off the record as parties plaintiffs. The suit was instituted by a large number of persons who purported to be shebaits of a certain deity known as Lakshmi Janardan Jew established by the Nandis of Jamgram in the district of Hooghly and the defendants are all co-shebaits of the plaintiffs. The prayers in the plaint are of a twofold character. The first prayer is for a declaration that plaintiff 1 has been duly elected one of the managing shebaits of the deity in place of defendant 1 who has been validly removed by the majority of the shebaits in accordance with the provisions of the deed of endowment. The second and the alternative prayer is for removal of defendan...
Tag this Judgment!Abhoy Kanta GohaIn Vs. Gopinath Deb Goswami and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-18-1942
Reported in: AIR1943Cal460
Pal, J.1. This appeal is by defendant 1 in a suit for declaration that the transactions referred to in the plaint related to the property described in Schedule 'Kha' of the plaint and that the plaintiff thereby acquired title to this property though the description given thereof in the several documents was inadequate. The plaintiff also prays for rectification of the relevant documents and for possession of the property on partition by metes and bounds. The property which the plaintiff now claims as having been the real subject-matter of the several transactions is entered in the General Register of Revenue Free Estates in the Assam Valley Districts as serial No. 4, No. 10 of 1863-64 Bamuni Grant, situated in Thana Sadar, Mouza Mikir Bamuni. A certified copy of an extract from the General Register is Ex. 10 in this case. In the present plaint this property is given in Schedule 'Kha' and there it is described as78.68 acres out of revenue free (F.S.) land measuring 238 acres 3 karas bel...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »