Kolkata Court December 1949 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.
Mohammad Mateen Vs. Baijnath Bajoria and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-02-1949
Reported in: AIR1951Cal358,54CWN287
P.B. Mukharji, J.1. This is a suit by the pltf. for the recovery of possession of premises No. 83, Lower Circular Road, Calcutta, and for mesne profits.2. Nagendra Nath Das and Ramesh Chandra Bhowmick were the joint owners of 83, Lower Circular Road, which was a vacant plot of land. By a registered lease dated 29-11-1943, the said owners Nagendra Nath Das and Ramesh Chandra Bhowmick let out the said vacant land to the defts., carrying on business in the name of National Motors for a term of 3 years with effect from 1-12-1943. The lease provides that on the expiry of the said term the defts. should deliver quiet and peaceful possession to the lessors. By a conveyance dated 4-5-1946, the said Nagendra Nath Das and Ramesh Chandra Bhowmick sold the said land to the pltf. Notice of the transfer was duly given to the defts. and the defts. were asked to attorn and pay rent to the pltf. The defts. paid rent to the pltf. thereafter until the determination of the said lease. The lease expired on...
Hooghly Bank Ltd. Vs. Mahendra Nath Mukhopadhyaya and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-02-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Cal195,54CWN327
1. This is an appeal against an appellate decree of the District Judge of Hooghly affirming the decree of the Subordinate Judge, 2nd Court of the same place.2. The facts are very simple. The appellant is a successor-in-interest of one Prannath Choudhury of Satkhira. The defendants are the successors-in-interest of one Raj Krishna, Mukherjee. Both parties are assignees. Prannath Choudhury gave a putni lease of his share of touzi No. 37 of the Hooghly Collectorate to Raj Krishna Mukherjee, one of the terms of which was You shall submit duly year after year in my office the Jamawasil baki papers etc., and the Lowazima papers.' On 1st May 1942, the plaintiff, the Hooghly Bank Ltd., purchased also the putni interest and took delivery of possession on 30th June 1942. They found an utter absence of papers and as the assignees of the original creators of the putni they have now called upon the defendants, the assignees of the putni holder, for the lowazima and collection papers not submitted p...
Khorshed Ali and ors. Vs. the King
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-02-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Cal202
Das Gupta, J.1. These two applications are against two orders of conviction and sentence under Section 7 of Act XXIV [24] of 1946, read with Section 8 of the same Act, in two different cases. In both the cases the petitioners were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two and a half months, and the paddy was forfeited.2. They were heard together, as both of them raise the same question of law--the question whether on the alleged date of contravention of orders for which the petitioners have been convicted, 23rd September 1948--Act XXIV [24] of 1946 was in force. Mr. Mukherjee who has argued the cases for all the petitioners has contended that Act XXIV [24] of 1946 ceased to be in force after 3lst March 1948. If this contention be correct, it must be held that the conviction of the petitioners for acts committed on 23rd September 1948, would be unsustainable.3. Admittedly, Act XXIV [24] of 1946 is, or was a temporary Act. As the preamble states, it was enacted to provide for the contin...
Talbot and Co. Vs. Haricharan Halwasiya and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-01-1949
Reported in: AIR1952Cal47
P.B. Mukharji, J.1. This is a suit by Messrs. Talbot & Co., a registered firm, for the recovery of possession of the premises No. 113, Park Street, Calcutta. There is also a claim for mesne profits.2. Messrs. Talbot & Co. were appointed Receivers of the said premises by order of Lort-Williams J. in Suit No. 991 of 1929, 'Sm. Provabati Debi v. J. C. Galstaun and Ors.' That order was made on 12-5-1930. By a further order made in that suit by Ameen Ali J. on 12-1-1938 the plaintiffs as Receivers were given liberty to grant lease for 10 years of the said premises to Messrs. Ganeshdas Ramgopal. The present defendants are carrying on business under the name and style of Ganeshdas Ramgopal at 1, Chittaranjan Avenue, Calcutta. Originally there were 3 defendants one of whom - Nawal Kishore Halwasiya - died pending the suit and the necessary amendment was duly made bringing on the record the legal representatives of the deceased defendant. In pursuance of the leave granted by this Court the plai...
Baburam Agarwalla Vs. Jamunadas Ramji and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-01-1949
Reported in: AIR1951Cal239,54CWN189
ORDERP.B. Mukharji, J.1. This is an application under Clause 13, Letters Patent for the transfer of Suit No. 39 of 1949 now pending in the Court of Subordinate Judge at Jalpaiguri. Baburam Agarwalla filed this suit against the applicants at Jalpaiguri for setting aside an ex parte decree passed by this Court on 11-12-1944, and thereafter sent to Jalpaiguri for execution against Baburam Agarwalla.2. The plaint in Jalpaiguri suit is annexed to the petition of the applicants who are a registered firm under the name of Jamunadas Ramji & Co., affirmed by Jamunadas Ramji, a partner of the applicant firm on 9-9-1949. The Jalpaiguri plaint claims to set aside the decree of this High Court in Suit No. 1273 of 1944 between the parties and dated, as I have said, 11-12-1944 on the ground that such decree was obtained by suppression of summons and of all notices and processes of this Court and there is a charge of fraud against the applicants. The relief claimed in the Jalpaiguri plaint is first fo...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›