Kolkata Court June 1946 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.
Asutosh Sasmal Vs. Bhupendra Narayan Bera and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-12-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal190
ORDERLodge, J.1. This case arises out of a proceeding under Section 26P, Ben. Ten. Act, as it stood before the amendment in the year 1938. The material facts are as follows: One Rama Nath Barik obtained a decree for money against one Chandra Mohan Pramanik and in execution of that decree had a tenancy which Chandra Mohan Pramanik held under opposite parties 1 to 7 put to sale. The tenancy was described as a mourashi mokarari jama. The decree-holder, Rama Nath Barik, purchased the tenancy in the auction sale. Notices of the sale and the necessary landlord's fees according to the provisions of Section 13, Ben. Ten. Act, read with Section 18 of the same Act, were sent to the landlords opposite parties and those notices were actually served on 20-9-1937. On 27-8-1940, the landlords made an application under Section 26J, Ben. Ten. Act, praying for a declaration that the tenancy was in fact an occupancy raiyati holding and not a mourashi mokarari jama and claiming a larger landlord's fee. Th...
Dharanidhar Ghose Vs. Janaki Nath Mukherjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-11-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal18
1. This appeal arises out of an application for execution of an order of the Subordinate Judge, 1st Court, Hooghly, dated 19-8-1943. This order was made in favour of the Commissioner of partition in a suit for partition. The order is in these terms : 'The plaintiff and defendants were repeatedly asked to pay but did not pay to the Commissioner. The Commissioner may execute the Court's order against the plaintiff and defendants to realise his dues.' The learned Subordinate Judge has dismissed the Commissioner's application for execution. Under Section 36, Civil P.C., the provisions of this Code relating to the execution of decrees shall, so far as they are applicable, be deemed to apply to the execution of orders. The matters of procedure laid down in Order 21, Civil P.C. for execution of decrees, will, so far as applicable, apply to execution of orders, which are not decrees. The Commissioner has appealed to this Court against the order rejecting his application for execution.2. A prel...
Abdul Malek Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal343
Chakravartti, J.1. The appellant Abdul Malek has been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge of Noakhali in agreement with the unanimous verdict of the jury under Section 395, Penal Code, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six years. Along with him seven other persons were placed on their trial. Of the total number of 8, six including the appellant were charged under Section 895, Penal Code, and one of those 6 as also two others were further charged under Section 412, Penal Code. The jury returned a unanimous verdict of not guilty as regards all the accused persons except the appellant. The appellant was found guilty, also by a unanimous verdict and he was sentenced as already stated.2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are the following. The prosecution case is that on 27-12-1943 a dacoity was committed at a place called Safarpur in the house of one Chandra Nath Chodhury. The dacoits were a very large number. It is said that they were about fifty and in the course of the...
Kashi Nath Mukherjee Vs. Nil Ratan Saha and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal304
1. This is an appeal on behalf of the plaintiff in a suit to recover a sum of money which he had deposited under Section 14A, Patni Taluks Regulation (VIII of 1819), in order to set aside a Patni sale; and the sole question which arises is whether he is entitled to recover. The appeal has been argued at great length, but may be disposed of on certain broad grounds.2. The suit was dismissed by both the Courts below. Shortly stated, the facts which it is necessary to set out for the purposes of this appeal are as follows : The plaintiff's father Parbati Oharan Mukherjee held a mourashi mokarari tenure under the patni which belonged to one Nani Lai Saha, the predecessor-in-interest of defendants 1, 2 and 3. Nani Lal had purchased this patni at a mortgage sale held on 20-2-1922, for a sum of HS. 30,000 the mortgage having been executed by the former patnidars, the Sarkars, in favour of the plaintiff's father for a sum of Rs. 10,500. The patni rent having fallen into arrears, the zamindars ...
Governor-general in Council Vs. Tarak Nath Das and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-07-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal182
ORDERLodge, J.1. The facts of this case briefly are as follows: The plaintiff Tarak Nath Das booked certain articles for despatch by the B. and A. Railway from Dacca Station to Sealdah. The goods consisted of seven transformers, one power unit for a Philco set and one complete vibra portion of a radio set. The contents of the parcel were declared and at the request of the railway authorities the plaintiff gave the value of the consignment stating it to be Rs. 99 only. The consignment was lost. Thereupon the plain, tiff instituted a suit for recovery of Rs. 110 as damages for goods delivered to the B and A Railway and lost in transit. The case was heard by the Munsif, First Court at Dacca in Small Cause Court jurisdiction. It was contended on behalf of the defence that the defendants were protected by Section 75, Railways Act, inasmuch as the intrinsic value of the goods consigned exceeded Rs. 300 and the goods consigned were articles of the nature mentioned in Schedule 2 to the Railway...
Sm. Jeet Kumari Poddar and ors. Vs. Chittagong Engineering and Elecric ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-07-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal195
K.C. Chunder, J.1. Hariananda Poddar was killed by electric shock on 1st July 1939, at Sim Road, Naraynganj. A suit was filed for damages under the Fatal Accidents Act by the widow, two minor sons and a minor daughter of the deceased against the respondent, The Chittagong Engineering and Electric Supply Co., Ltd. and another, with whom we have no concern in this appeal, as the claim against him was dismissed and no appeal filed against the order of dismissal. The claim was decreed for Rs. 1500 and costs of Rs. 47-7-6 pies and Rs. 1110 was ordered to be paid as court-fees by the plaintiffs to the Government, as the plaintiffs had filed the suit as paupers. The appeal relates to the amount of damages and there is a cross-objection by the defendant-respondent against the findings and order of the learned Subordinate Judge. We shall take up the cross-objection first.2. The Subordinate Judge, 2nd Court, Dacca, found that for this death there was actionable negligence on the part of the defe...
Ram Kumar Agarwala Vs. Lakshmi Narayan Agarwala and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-06-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal157
Lodge, J.1. The facts giving rise to this appeal may be stated briefly. The plaintiffs are the owners of a joint business in Bogra town. Defendant 1 is the Sri Oudh Rice and Oil Mills, and the other defendants are said to be the owners of the Mills. The Mills manufacture mustard oil. The plaintiffs were the agents of the Mills for the sale of mustard oil. The plaintiffs ordered 400 tins of mustard oil from the mills for supplying to one Bholaram Jesraj. When the oil arrived at Bogra, the plaintiffs took delivery. Immediately thereafter the Sanitary Inspector of the local Municipality, seized the oil and sent samples to the Chemical Examiner for report. Thereafter Laksmi Narayan Agarwala. plaintiff 1, was prosecuted on a charge of being in possession of adulterated mustard oil, and was convicted and sentenced to undergo 6 weeks imprisonment and to pay a fine. On appeal the conviction was upheld but the sentence was reduced to a fine of Rs. 100 only.2. Plaintiffs sued the defendants for ...
Kumud Kanta Pahari and ors. Vs. Province of Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-06-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal209
Chakravartti, J.1. This appeal involves a question of some complexity, if not difficulty, and has been argued at some length.2. The facts are simple. The plaintiffs, who are the appellants before me, brought a suit for a declaration of their niskar brahmottar title to an area of a little over 7 bighas of land, but at the hearing it was explained that what they really claimed was a revenue-free right under a lakheraj grant of the non-badshahi lease. Their ease was that defendants 2 and 3 were really tenants under them, but had been wrongly recorded as holding under certain patnidars of the Estate Rupnarayanpur. That estate had recently been sold for arrears of revenue and purchased by the Province of Bengal and after its purchase, the Province had proceeded to recover rent from defendants 2 and 3 by the certificate procedure on the footing that the interest of the patnidars had ceased to exist. These happenings, the plaintiffs alleged, had cast a cloud upon their title and accordingly t...
Ram Mohan Rao Vs. Lalit Chandra Sen Gupta and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-06-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal351
Lodge, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for arrears of rent, for ejectment and for damages for use and occupation of the premises after termination of the tenancy by notice. The material facts are these:2. There was an oral contract between the parties regarding the lease of premises No. p. 15 Lansdowne Road Extension (Ground floor) and defendant 1 wrote a letter to plaintiff on 11-11-1941 setting out the terms agreed upon.3. The monthly rent was originally Rs. 55, but was reduced in 1942 by oral agreement to Rs. 40, in the period following enemy air raids on Calcutta. On 22-4-1943, plaintiff sent a letter to defendant 1 calling upon the latter to give vacant possession of the flat at the end of the last day of May. Defendant failed to comply. Hence the suit.4. The defendant contended that the time limited by the lease was expressed as commencing from 1-12-1941, therefore in computing the period of the lease, December 1 was to be excluded, and therefore the lease expired at the en...
Bahadur Sing Singhee and ors. Vs. Sreejut Kumar Bedkantha Singha Roy a ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-05-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal70
Sharpe, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff and arises out of a suit brought by him for obtaining a declaration that he was not liable to pay cess to the defendants under the terms of his patta and for an injunction restraining the defendants from realising cess from him and for refund of a sum of Rs. 159-5-6 paid by him under protest. The material facts are not disputed and are as follows. Kshirode Kanta Roy, predecessor of the defendants was the owner of touzi No. 2402 of 24 Parganas Collectorate in his 1/3rd share and the remaining 2/3rd belonged to his co-sharers Satish Kanta and others. As a result of and during some litigation Kshiroda and some of his co-sharers entered into an agreement with Sarat Chandra Goswami, predecessor of the pro forma defendant, for granting a patni patta for their 2/3rd share, in the event of success in the litigation, at a rent of Rs. 1500 per annum fixed in perpetuity. In accordance with this agreement, defendant No. 1, representing t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »