Kolkata Court September 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.
Ram Nagina Singh Vs. Governor-general in Council
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-02-1949
Reported in: AIR1952Cal306
Sinha, J.1. This is a suit for recovery of Rs. 18,011-3-3 on account of price of bricks supplied by the plff. to the Chief Engineer, Eastern Command & alternatively as compensation.2. The plff. is a manufacturer of bricks & has a brickfield at, among other places, Ballykhab in the district of Howrah. In January, 1942 an order was promulgated by the Govt. of Bengal in exercise of powers conferred by Clause (a) Sub-R. (2) of R. 81, Defence of India Rules, to the effect that no first & second class bricks manufactured in brick kilns within the areas specified in the order should be disposed of by sale or otherwise without a written permit issued by the Chief Controller of prices, Bengal or any officer authorised by him in writing in that behalf. The Sadar Sub-Division of the district of Howrah within which Ballykhal is situate is one of the areas specified in the said order.3. On 2-12-1943, the Controller of bricks, Bengal, issued three permits, viz., Permit Nos. 1604, 1605 & 1606, whereb...
Chintaharan Ghose and ors. Vs. Gujaraddi Sheik and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-02-1949
Reported in: AIR1951Cal456
R.P. Mookerjee, J.1. This is a pltfs. appeal in a representative suit brought under Rule 8 of Order 1, Civil P. C., on behalf of the Hindus of the village of Alampur against the Muslims of the same village for a declaration that the suit land is one in which the public has got the right of use as playground or grazing ground etc., & for an injunction to restrain the defts. from using the land as a burial ground.2. The pltfs.' case is that in Khatian No. 159/1 of Mouza Alampur covering an area of 3 bighas & 1 cottah, 1 bigha & 2 cottahs was a graveyard of the Muslims of that village & the remaining 1 bigha and 19 cottah was used by the villagers as a football ground. This football ground is also claimed to be used as a grazing ground for the cattle of the villagers. There had been a previous litigation in respect of this property in 1928 when a representative suit was brought on behalf of the Muslims of that village for a declaration that the lands covered by the entire Khatian were bur...
Province of Bengal Vs. Amulya Dhon Addy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-02-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Cal356,54CWN297
R.C. Mitter, J. 1. Premises No. 19, Surah Third Lane, was acquired for the purpose of Improvement Scheme No. IV (Maniktolla) made by the Board of Trustees for the Improvement of Calcutta and sanctioned by the Local Government under the provisions of the Calcutta Improvement Act, v [5] of 1911 B. C. The said premises was at all material times an open piece of land comprising an area of 10 bighas 12 cottas 36 square ft. There were two tanks within it. It abutted on the Sura third Lane which was to its East. It had a vista on a blind lane which stopped at a point of its Southern boundary. There was no roadway on the acquired premises in continuation of that blind lane. The said blind lane is a public one. The plot is shown in the Key plan, EX. 1. On 27th August 1943 the Collector made his award. He gave Rs. 61548-14-0 for the land, Rs. 725 for the trees and Rs. 9311-1.0 as statutory allowance--total Rs. 71614-15 odd.2. The claimants, who are the respondents before us, were dissatisfied wi...
Kunja Behari Barman and ors. Vs. Mritunjoy Prosad Roy Choudhury and or ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-01-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Cal54
ORDERG.N. Das, J.1. These two Rules are at the instance of the applicants under S. 37A, Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act. The facts are shortly these : The petitioners are agricultural tenants under the Bhowanipur Wards Estate the proprietors whereof are opposite parties Nos. 1 to 8 represented by the Manager, Court of Wards. The petitioners held two tenancies and rents having fallen into arrears at the instance of the Bhowanipur Wards Estate two certificates for rent were issued and in execution of these certificates the two tenancies were brought to sale on 24th January 1938. Possession through Court was taken on 17th June 1939. Section 37A, Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act was inserted by Bengal Act, II [2] of 1942, and came into force by a Notification on 18th June 1942. On 4th June 1943 two applications which have given rise to the present revision cases were filed by the debtors under Section 37A of the Act. These two applications were registered as cases Nos. 625 (S) of 1948 and 6...
Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal Vs. Sm. Ashalata Devi.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-01-1949
Reported in: [1951]20ITR326(Cal)
CHATTERJEE, J. - This is a reference at the instance of the Income-tax authorities for the opinion of this Court on one question which is formulated in the following terms :-'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the income received under the deed of dedication (Arpannama) dated the 31st March, 1922, is chargeable at the maximum rate under the first proviso to Section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act.'Sri Sital Chandra Banerji, a pious Hindu governed by the Dayabhaga School of Hindu law, dedicated very valuable properties to two dated 31st March, 1922. The Income-tax Officer assessed the assessee under Section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act and assessed the deities as an association of persons at the maximum rate on the ground that the shares of the beneficiaries were indeterminate.An appeal was preferred to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner who set aside the assessment and held that the shares of the deities were determinate and the entire income was equally divisible b...
Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal Vs. PulIn Behari Dey.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-01-1949
Reported in: [1951]20ITR314(Cal)
HARRIES, C.J. - This is a reference made by the Appellate Tribunal stating a case upon the following question :-'Whether on the facts and circumstances of this case the Appellate Tribunal were right in holding that although the shares of the two deities are not defined in the deed of endowment, their shares are defined in law, that is, they are equal, and therefore the first proviso to Section 41 is inapplicable.'To appreciate the points involved in this case it will be necessary shortly to set out the facts. On 23rd March, 1893, one Madan Gopal Dey executed a deed of trust and by that deed he transferred certain properties to trustees for the maintenance and the worship of two deities, Thakur Harihar Prabhu and Thakurani Sachimata. It appears that Thakur Harihar Prabhu was a family idol which had been installed by the settlors predecessors, but the Thankurani had been installed by the settlor himself. This appears clear from the will made by the settlors wife shortly afterwards to whi...
Sekandar Ali Vs. Joy Chand Seraogi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-01-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Cal566
1. This rule is directed against an order of the learned Subordinate Judge of Murshidabad rejecting an application for amendment of a plaint. As originally filed on 28th August 1915, the plaint asked for a declaration of title to certain properties and for redemption of mortgage as regards certain other properties and for delivery of khas possession of all these properties. For an appreciation of the nature of the alteration sought to be made by the amendment which was prayed for but rejected, it is necessary to mention certain facts which led up to this present litigation.2. All the properties in suit belonged originally to two persons, Eakub and Ebrahim. On 20th March 1923 they executed a karbarnama charging the properties of schedule kha of the plaint which included four items out of the ka schedule properties, in favour of opposite party 1 and the predecessor of the opposite parties 2 to 5. On 28th June 1926, one of these persons viz., Ebrahim executed a mortgage bond in favour of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›