Kolkata Court September 1950 Judgments
Nilkantha Pati Vs. Kshitish Chandra Satpati and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-07-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Cal338
R.P. Mookerjee, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant and arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs claiming rent for the demised premises.2. The plaintiffs claimed to be entitled to recover arrears of rent with cess and damages for the years 1349 to 1352 B. S. The only question for determination in this appeal is whether the defendant is entitled to a total suspension of the rent or a proportionate abatement of the same for the period in suit, on the ground that the plaintiffs landlords had dispossessed the tenant from one of the plots in suit, in spite of protests from the tenant defendant.3. The learned 'Munsif found that out of a total area of 7.48 acres constituting the jama in suit the landlords had dispossessed the defendant in respect of C. S. Plot No. 816 covering an area of .04 acre. He observed :'It seems to me that the plaintiffs finding the position of the C. S. Plot No. 816 vis a vis their own plot No. 802 actuated by greed simply illegally and highhandedly grabbed...
Tag this Judgment!Jatish Chandra Ghosh Vs. B.K. Sinha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-07-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Cal404,55CWN104
ORDERSinha, J.1. That the said person shall reside at his home in Ghatal Town P. S. Ghatan, Dt. Midnapore.2. That he shall not leave the jurisdiction beyond two miles of Ghatal Municipal area P. S. Ghatal, Dist. Midnapore without obtaining previous permission in writing of the Superintendent of Police, Midnapore.3. That he shall report himself daily to the Officer-in-Charge of Ghatal P. S.4. That he shall not directly or indirectly organise, promote or take part in any public meeting, demonstration or procession and5. That he shall not associate himself with & correspond in writing with any person who is known or believed to be a member of unlawful association. If he receives any written communication from any such person he shall deliver it to the officer-in-charge of Ghatal P. S.'2. The petnr is a medical practitioner. He states that he has been practising in medicine for over 30 years, in the Sub-Division of Ghatal, in the district of Midnapore. He says that his practice takes him o...
Tag this Judgment!Udoy Chand Mahatab Vs. Sm. Sarojini Devi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-07-1950
Reported in: AIR1952Cal143,55CWN294
R.P. Mookerjee, J.1. Separate accounts were registered under the Hooghly Collectorate in respect of Touzi No. 40. Separate accounts Nos. 40/ 2 and 40/3 were sold on the 25th June, 1941 for arrears of revenue and were purchased by the plaintiff Sarojini Devi. Each of these two separate accounts comprised a 7 anna share of the Touzi. Under this Touzi defendant No. 1 Maharaja of Burdwan who is the appellant in this appeal holds a Patni at an annual rent of' Rs. 3,000/-, in his capacity as Trustee executor of the Estate of late Bholanath Singh Roy. After the purchase in the revenue sale as aforesaid Sarojini Devi sued the Maharaja in respect of Patni rent for the last quarter of 1347, the quarter of 1348 and the second and third quarters of 1349 B. Section in her 14 annas share, impleading the proprietors of the remaining; two annas share as pro forma defendants Nos. 2 to 4. During the pendency of this suit, and at the instance of the original proprietors of that separate account the sale ...
Tag this Judgment!Chanduram and ors. Vs. the Municipal Commissioners of Kurseong Municip ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-07-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Cal398
R.P. Mookerjee, J.1. These two appeals arise out of two suits brought under the provisions of Order 21, Rule 63, C. P. C. for establishment of the pltf's. right to proceed against certain holdings. The executing Ct. had allowed the claims as put forward by defts. 4 to 10 who are the applts. in this Ct.2. Defendants 1 to 3 were the recorded owners of two premises situated within the ambit of the Municipality of Kurseong. The pltf. Municipality brought two suits against the said recorded owners for recovery of arrear rates in respect of those two premises as had accrued due for the period 1937-1940. The suits were decreed on 4-4-1940. In execution of the said decrees the two holdings were attached before being put up to sale. Defts. 4 to 10 preferred claims against the order for attachment & contended that they had previously obtained a decree against defts. 1 to 3 in Money Suit No. 21 of 1939 & in execution of that decree the properties in suit had been purchased by them on 21-2-1940. D...
Tag this Judgment!Jyotindra Nath Mitra Vs. Sourindranath Dutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-07-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Cal422,55CWN123
Sen, J.1. This Rule was obtained by the tenant deft. against an order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, 6th Ct. of Alipore, giving certain directions to the tenant deft. purporting to be under Section 14 (4), West Bengal Premises Rent Control (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1950.2. The facts briefly are as follows: The landlord opposite party instituted a suit for ejectment on the ground that he had terminated the tenancy by a valid notice to quit. He sought to remove the bar against obtaining a decree for ejectment provided by the West Bengal Premises Rent Control (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1948, by asserting that he required the premises bona fide for his own use & occupation. In other words, he sought to remove the protection which the tenant was granted by the West Bengal Premises Rent Control (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1948, against ejectment by relying upon proviso (f) of Section 11 of the aforesaid Act. The aforesaid Act was repealed by the West Bengal Premises Rent Control...
Tag this Judgment!Muralidhar Kulthia Vs. Sm. Tara Dye
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-06-1950
Reported in: AIR1953Cal349
Bachawat, J.1. This is a suit for the recovery of possession of No. 11/1, Hari Sarkar Lane, Calcutta, arrears of rent and mesne profits.2. In 1942 one Srichand Khettry, the husband of the defendant borrowed moneys from the plaintiff and executed deeds of mortgage and further charge over the premises in favour of the plaintiff. On 15-6-1943 the total dues of the plaintiff from Srichand amounted to Rs. 6240/-.3. By a registered conveyance dated 15-6-1943 Srichand sold and conveyed the premises to the plaintiff for the sum of Rs. 7500/-. The consideration was paid by adjustment of the outstanding dues and by payment of Rs. 1260/- in cash. By a lease dated 15-6-1943 the plaintiff leased the premises to the defendant for a period of 5 years commencing from the last day of July, 1943 and ending on June 30, 1948. By this lease-defendant agreed to pay to the plaintiff a monthly rent of Rs. 40/- as also the owner's and occupier's shares of taxes and the plaintiff was given a right of re-entry i...
Tag this Judgment!Khagendra Nath De Vs. District Magistrate of West Dinajpur
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-06-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Cal3,55CWN53
Harries, C.J.1. This is a rule issued by the Court calling upon the District Magistrate of West Dinajpur to show cause why a writ in the nature of mandamus or prohibition should not issue with respect to an order of externment made by the said District Magistrate.2. The matter first came before Sinha J. who referred the hearing of the petition to a Bench in view of the importance of the questions raised. The petition has accordingly been heard by this Bench.3. On 11-6-1950, Sri R. Banerji, District Magistrate of West Dinajpur made the following order:'Whereas I am satisfied that the person known as Sri Khagendra Nath De alias Battu, son of late Surendra Nath De of Rangpur (Pak.) and of Balurghat it doing a subversive act:Now, therefore, with a view to preventing the said person from doing such Act, in exercise of the power conferred by clause (a) of Sub-section (1) of Section 21, West Bengal Security Act 1950 (West Bengal Act XIX [19] of 1950), which I have been empowered to exercise u...
Tag this Judgment!Province of Bengal Vs. Commissioner for the Port of Calcutta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-06-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Cal271,55CWN350
G.N. Das, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant 1, Province of Bengal, against the judgment and decree dated 31-3-1943, passed by Mr. S. C. Dutta, learned Subordinate Judge, 1st Court Howrah.2. The plaintiffs are the Commissioners for the Port of Calcutta, a body corporate, constituted under Bengal Act V [5] of 1870 hereinafter to be called the Port Commissioners.3. The case of the plaintiffs is that by a Government notification dated 9-10-1880 the Telkalghat landing stage and bathing ghat on the shores of the river Hooghly were declared a public landing stage and a public bathing ghat under the Calcutta Port Improvement Act V [5] of 1870, hereinafter to be called the Port Act, 1870; that by an agreement dated 17-12-1884 and entered into with the sanction of the Government, between Messrs. Burn and Co. Ltd., who are permanent lessees from the proprietors of the mainland estate, and the plaintiffs, the latter got 150' of the river frontage for improvement of the said landing stage; th...
Tag this Judgment!Aga Mirza Ahmed and ors. Vs. Subodh Chandra Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-06-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Cal312,55CWN70
Lahiri, J.1. This appeal is by the plaintiffs and it arises out of a suit for a declaration that certain entries made by the revenue authorities in the record of rights prepared under Part II of Chap.X, Bengal Tenancy Act, are illegal and ultra vires.2. The plaintiff's case, as stated in the plaint, is as follows : The plaintiffs are proprietors of touzi No. 1453 comprising Lot No. 88 Mouza Kharampur Abad and Lot No. 89 comprising Mouza Chimta and also of touzi No. 1448 comprising Lot No. 93 Mouza Par Bhawanipur and Jamberia Abad in the Sunderbans. The predecessor in interest of the plaintiffs, named Nawab Nazir Siddi Nazar Ali took settlements of the aforesaid lots for 99 years expiring on 31-3-1942. The predecessor of the defendants took Ganti Settlement of about 3700 and 2700 bighas of land within Lots 89 and 93 by a patta dated 21-3-1850. By this patta it was settled that rent would be paid for the arable land at the rate of 12 as. per bigha and the rent of the patit lands was to b...
Tag this Judgment!Monmotha Nath Mukherjee Vs. Shebaits of Sree Sree Sreedhar Jew and anr ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-06-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Cal330,54CWN973
Lahiri, J.1. These three appeals are by the plaintiff and arise out of as many suits for the assessment of fair and equitable rent in respect of lands recorded in Khatians 89, 40 and 38 of Mouza Saharaberia. The plaintiff's case is that he is the Patnidar of the aforesaid Mouza under the Maharaja of Burdwan and that the disputed land is part of his Mal assets. The defendants have been recorded in the C. S. record as raiyats under the plaintiff but in the column of rent there is an entry of Niskar and in the remarks column there is an entry ^^chl cRljsj m/os fc:) n[ky izek.k lw=***-The plaintiff prays for a declaration that the entry about Niskar is wrong and for assessment of fair and equitable rent.2. The defendants contest the suit on the ground that the disputed land was never part of the Hal assets of the Mahal and that the defendants and their predecessors have been holding the lands without payment of rent for more than 12 years and as such the prayer for assessment of rent is no...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »