Kolkata Court December 1943 Judgments
Rajani Kanta Dhara Vs. Manmatha Nath Das and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-22-1943
Reported in: AIR1945Cal1
Roxburgh, J.1. The appellant, Rajani Kanta Dhara, has obtained a mortgage decree for sale for a sum which now amounts to about Rs. 5000 against defendants 2 and 3 in Title Suit No. 15 of 1933 in the Court of the First Subordinate Judge, Howrah; while defendants 2 and 3 in turn have been awarded by the same decree costs amounting to about Rs. 1400 against the plaintiff. The appellant has no personal remedy against the defendants in respect of the amount decreed in his favour. Defendants 2 and 3 have sought to execute their decree for costs in Title Execution case No. 27 of 1941 of the same Court, and the appellant has claimed a set-off of the amount due by him for costs against the amount due to him on the mortgage decree; he relies on the provisions of Rules 19 and 20 of Order 21, Civil P. C. The appellant's claim for set-off has been refused by the trial Court, hence this appeal. 2. When asked why his clients object to the set-off, Mr. Das on behalf of the respondents, states that the...
Tag this Judgment!Thakurani Sri Sri Annapurna Debi Vs. Sm. Shiva Sundari Dassi and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-20-1943
Reported in: AIR1945Cal376
ORDERSen, J.1. This is an application by the petitioner to be appointed next friend of the plaintiff Thakurani Sri Sri Annapurna Debi in this suit. The suit was instituted on 24th August 1938 by one Sreemati Pramila Sundari Laha as next friend of the plaintiff deity against certain persons whom she describes as the sebaits of the idol and certain transferees from them. Broadly speaking, the suit is for a declaration that the property transferred was debutter property and incapable of being dealt with by the defendants as secular property. Pramila Sundari Laha died on 2nd February 1943. The present applicant Sreemati Karunamoyee Dassi in a daughter-in-law of the family, and she wishes to be appointed next friend of the plaintiff deity for the purpose of proceeding with the suit.2. On behalf of the respondents the application is opposed on certain grounds with which I shall now deal. It is argued that this suit was not properly constituted inasmuch as Pramila Sundari could not be a next ...
Tag this Judgment!Prosad Das Mullick S/O Shyama Charan Mullick, Person-in-charge of Hoog ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-16-1943
Reported in: AIR1945Cal30
B.K. Mukherjea, J.1. This rule is directed against a judgment of Rule 8. Simpson Esq., District Judge of Hooghly dated 2nd February 1943, passed on an election petition presented by opposite party 1 under Section 36, Bengal Municipal Act, to set aside the election of opposite parties 2 and 3 as commissioners of the Hooghly Chinsurah Municipality. The material facts are not in controversy and may be shortly stated as follows: The term of the Hooghly Chinsurah Municipality which consists of 18 commissioners including the Chairman and the Vice-chairman was normally to have expired on 14th October 1942, under Section 56(1), Bengal Municipal Act. The term was however extended under el. (5) of the section by a notification dated 6th November 1941. On 21st March 1942, the Additional District Magistrate of Hooghly in exercise of the powers conferred upon him under Section 24(3), Bengal Municipal Act, read with Rule 2(1) (a) (i) of the election rules framed under the Act fixed Sunday 8th Novemb...
Tag this Judgment!Jamunadhar Poddar Firm Vs. Jamunaram Bhakat and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-16-1943
Reported in: AIR1944Cal138
1. One Moti Bhagat, a person governed by the Mitakshara law, died leaving him surviving four sons, Motni alias Sew Gobind, Earn Kissen, Sree Kissen and Balgobind. Balgovind is dead and his sons, Jamnarayan and Kanailal, are defendants 1 and 2 in the suit. The other three sons of Moti Bhagat are defendants 3 to 5. Sew Gobind's & sons are defendants 6 to 11; Earn Kissen has no male descendant and Sree Kissen's sons are defendants 12 and 13. Jodhanprosad and Bhagwandas, who are defendants 8 and 9, are two of the sons of Sew Gobind. It is admitted by both sides that the aforesaid descendants of Moti Bhagat form a joint Hindu family governed by the Mitakshara law.2. A business was carried on at Chaibassa and other places under the name and style of 'Jodhanprosad Bhagwandas Firm.' Whether' that business was a joint family business of the descendants of Moti Bhagat or was a partnership business in which only some of the descendants of Moti Bhagat were inter, posted is an important point in th...
Tag this Judgment!PulIn Behari Tewari and ors. Vs. Ram Ranjan Hati and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-15-1943
Reported in: AIR1944Cal219
1. Lot Rosowa appertains to Touzi no. 111 of Beerbhoom Collectorate. The past proprietors of the said touzi settled the same in patni taluk to one Shibohandra Chakravarty at an annual rent of rs. 7623-5-8. The patnidar was to pay the revenue of the touzi (Rs. 4173-14 annas) by barat and the balance of the patni rent as munafa to the proprietor of the said touzi. The plaintiffs purchased 5 as. 19 gundas 3 karas odd share of that touzi at a revenue sale.2. In 1935 they brought a rent suit, Rent Suit No. 24 of 1935, against a large number of persons for recovery of the arrears of rents due in their share for the years 1339.1341. We call those defendants, for brevity's sake, the Mitters, the Tewaris, the shebaits, the Kabirajes and the trustees of the Jagadamba Estate. It is admitted by the parties, that the Kabirajes had at that time 10 annas share of the patni and were liable as between them and the other patnidars for that share of rent for the period for which rent was claimed in that ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Ranjan Das Vs. Maharaj Bahadur Sinha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-09-1943
Reported in: AIR1944Cal88
1. This appeal is by the judgment-debtor and is directed against an Order refusing to stay proceedings for delivery of possession in a certain execution proceeding in accordance with a notice served upon the Court under the provisions of Section 34, Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act. The sale took place on 22nd September 1937, and was confirmed on 8th November 1937. The appellant's father, who was the original judgment-debtor, then filed the usual application under Section 174, Ben, Ten. Act. The ensuing miscellaneous case was compromised on terms-the terms being such as are frequently found in cases of this kind. The judgment-debtor agreed to pay Rs. 47-10-5 pies at once and the balance in eight quarterly instalments. If the instalments were duly paid, the application under Section 174 would be allowed and the sale set aside. In the case of default, the application would be dismissed. The first five instalments were duly paid and then there was a default. After the default, the judgment...
Tag this Judgment!Asher Vs. London Film Productions, Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-08-1943
Reported in: [1945]13ITR6(Cal)
LORD GREENE, M.R. - This appeal arises out of a friendly controversy between the respondents, London Film Productions, Ltd., and the appellant, Mr. Asher, with whom they have certain contractual relations. Under the relevant contact sums have fallen to be paid to Mr. Asher and will in future fall to be paid by the respondents. The controversy is whether the respondents, in making those payments, are entitled to deduct tax under rule 21 of the General Rules applicable to all Schedules of the Income-tax Act, 1918. Mr. Asher contends that, if these receipts be of an income nature, he is only liable to direct assessment. If that contention were correct there would be no legal right in the respondents to deduct the tax.The way in which the question as staged is by an action brought by Mr. Asher to recover from the respondents the amount of the deduction. I have often thought that the cases of this kind it is extremely inconvenient that the Crown (which is vitally interested) cannot, under t...
Tag this Judgment!A.N.M. Azizal Bari Vs. Jew Mahammad Khan Kabuli and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-07-1943
Reported in: AIR1944Cal230
1. This appeal raises a question of court-fees. The appellant filed an application under Section 38, Bengal Money-lenders Act, and obtained a declaration that the amount due was Rs. 1085. He has filed an appeal by which he asks the Court to say that only Rs. 150 is due. Thus there can be no question that, if any ad valorem fee is demanded, it must be paid on the sum of Rs. 935. The learned Judge observed that the appellant has not paid ad valorem court-fee and thereupon dismissed the appeal.2. The contention of the appellant is that a fixed fee of Rs. 1 is payable under Article 11 of Sch. 2, Court-Fees Act. If he is wrong, then the case must come within Article 17. The question is not free from difficulty. It depends upon whether it can be said that the appeal is not from a decree or an Order having the force of a decree. The appeal is specifically provided for by Section 38 (3). That Sub-section provides:A declaration under this section shall be subject to appeal, if any, as if it wer...
Tag this Judgment!Satish Chandra Seal and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-06-1943
Reported in: AIR1945Cal137
Das, J.1. Six persons, namely Satis Chandra Seal, Sudhir Kumar alias Dulo Bose and Brojendra Nath Alias Cheton Mitra being the three appellants in Appeal No. 109 of 1943 and Charubala Dassi being the appellant in Appeal No. 130 of 1943 and Surendra Nath Mitra and Beni Madhab Moulik were put upon their trial on a variety of charges before the Additional Sessions Judge of Khulna. The appellant Satis was charged under Section 409, Penal Code, or alternatively under Section 52, Post Office Act. He was unanimously found guilty, by the jury under Section 409, Penal Code, and was sentenced under that section to six years rigorous imprisonment and to a fine of RS. 200 and in default of payment to a further period of one year's rigorous imprisonment. The appellants Sudhir and Brojendra were charged under Section 409/120B, Penal Code, or alternatively under Section 52/70, Post Office Act, and also under Section 411, Penal Code. The jury brought in an unanimous verdict of guilty against both of t...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. S. Roy Vs. Karuna Kisore Kar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-02-1943
Reported in: AIR1945Cal452
ORDERSen, J.1. This is an application by the defendant for relief under the Bengal Money-Lenders Act. The plaintiff, Dr. S. Roy, instituted a suit against the defendant on a promissory note which had been executed by the defendant in favour of one Capt. N. N. Dutt endorsed by Capt. N. N. Dutt in favour of the plaintiff. The promissory note was for the sum of Rs. 11,970 and interest was payable thereon at 12 per cent. The suit was instituted in this Court in the year 1936 and a decree was passed ex parte on 20th November 1936. This decree was transferred for execution to the Court of the Third Subordinate Judge at Alipore, and execution proceedings are still pending in that Court. The defendant has moved this Court by an application in which various allegations have been made many of which it is not necessary for me to consider. The main point urged is that the interest charged on the note was in excess of that payable under the Bengal Money-Lenders Act. The defendant claims that this a...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »