Kolkata Court September 1953 Judgments
Mayasankar Vyash (Vallavji) and ors. Vs. Gouri Sankar Matilal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-10-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal256,58CWN463
1. The appellants filed this appeal valuing the same at Rs. 10,081/8/- with court-fee stamps for Rs. 772/87-. On an objection raised by the Stamp Reporter a reference was made to the Taxing Officer under Section 5 of the Court-Fees Act. The Taxing Officer held that the valuation, as stated in the memorandum of appeal, was rot correct and the amount of court-fee paid was short by Rs. 660/-. The appellants were called upon to file the deficit court-fees of Rs. 660/-. They took time on several occasions but did not file the deficit court-fees.2. The appellants have now intimated the Court that they have not been able to secure adequate funds and are not in a position to file the deficit court-fees. They have, accordingly, moved the Court for a direction to the office to return the memorandum of appeal along with the court-fees paid. The application is really one for refund of the court-fees paid on the memorandum of appeal.3. We have heard the petitioners and the Senior Government Pleader...
Tag this Judgment!Mahammad Nassair Vs. Mahammad Yusuf and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-10-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal524
R.P. Mookerjee, J. 1. The plaintiff appellant had filed a suit out of which the present appeal arises for partition of certain items of property on the allegation that they were held jointly with the defendants. Objection was raised on behalf of some of the defendants in respect of some of the properties alleging that such properties were not divisible ones. The suit has been decreed in part.2. In the present appeal the plaintiff appellant had originally raised only one question.3. The property described as item No. 7 is premises Nos. 20, 20/1 and 21 Beliaghata Main Road. The plaintiff claimed that this was a joint property. The defendants' case, on the other hand, was that this property was made Wakf under a registered deed of Wakf-al-Aulad exe-cuted on 14-4-1920, which has been marked as. Exhibit A in the case. The learned Subordinate Judge accepted the case as made by the defendants and dismissed the plaintiff's claim in respect of this property.4. Mr. Sen appearing on behalf of the...
Tag this Judgment!DeorajIn Debi and anr. Vs. Satyadhyan Ghosal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-09-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal119,58CWN64
Sen, J.1. This revisional application is directed against an order of Munsif, 2nd Court, Alipore, rejecting an application under Section 28 of the Thika Tenancy Act, 1949.2. The opposite parties Satya Dhan Ghosal and others as plaintiffs instituted Title Suit No. 40 of 1947 against the petitioners Deorajin Debi and another for their ejectment from some Busteeland at No, 49/5, Circular Garden Beach Road. There was also a claim for arrears of rent and mesne profits, in the plaint which was filed on February 8, 1947, the petitioners were described as monthly Bharatia tenants. The defendant petitioners filed a written statement on May 22, 1947, and the suit was still pending on October 26, 1948, when the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Ordinance, 1948, came into force.3. The defendant petitioners did not ultimately contest the suit which was decreed ex parte on February 10, 1949. But though the suit was decreed ex parte and no issue was raised as to the nature of the tenancy, the learned Munsif mad...
Tag this Judgment!Tapendra Nath Roy Vs. University of Calcutta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-09-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal141,58CWN295
ORDERSinha, J. 1. This is a rule issued upon the respondent to show cause why an order in the nature of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ should not be issued by this Court cancelling or quashing the order under which the petitioner has been made eligible only to sit for a Compartmental B.Sc. Examination, or why an order in the nature of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ should not be issued directing the respondents to declare that the applicant has passed the B.Sc. Examination held in 1953, and for other reliefs.2. The facts are shortly as follows. The petitioner was sent up by the Surendranath College, a College affiliated to the Calcutta University, for the Bachelor of Science Examination for the year 1953. He duly appeared therein, in three subjects, namely, Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry. The marks obtained by the petitioner in the said examination are as follows :Marks ObtainedFull marks.Mathematics (Pass) ...225300Physics (Pass) Theoretical...1...
Tag this Judgment!Ramani Mohan Sen and ors. Vs. Sm. Nilabja Barani Debi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-09-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal146,58CWN147
P.N. Mookerjee, J.1. This rule is directed against an order of the learned District Judge, Burdwan, refusing to interfere under Section 40A of the Bengal Agricultural Act with an order of the Appellate Officer Katwa, affirming an award passed in favour of an applicant under Section 37A of the said Act.2. The proceedings have a long history. The sale in question was held in execution of a decree for rent on or about the 27th of August, 1937. The landlords decree-holders who were the Patnidars--the defaulting property being a Dar Patni under them, of which the judgment-debtors were the tenants or Darpatnidars--were the purchasers. The sale was confirmed on or about the 31st of August, 1938. Thereafter, after the coming into force of the amended Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act introducing Section 37A into that statute the present opposite party, who was one of the tenants judgment-debtors, made an application under that section for reliefs provided therein. This application was filed on t...
Tag this Judgment!The Apcar Collieries Ltd. Vs. Radha Gobinda Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-09-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal480
P.N. Mookerjee, J. 1. Three quarters of a century back, on or about 20-8-1878, the appellants' predecessors took permanent settlement of the underground rights in the lands in suit from the respondents' predecessors. The relevant kabuliyat which was described as a 'Mokrari Taluka Kabuliyat' was duly registered in accordance with law and a certified copy thereof is Ext. 1 in the present case.It appears from the kabuliyat (Ext. 1) that the lessees had also certain rights in the corresponding surface land. A selami of Rs. 5,039/8/- was paid at the time of the settlement and the annual rent or jama was fixed at 'Company's current sicca Rs. 503978/-'. This total rent was mentioned in the schedule of the kabuliyat as 'Rs. 5,039/8/-' and was payable in eleven kists or instalments of Rs. 420/- each in each of the months of Bhadra to Asar of each Bengali year and a twelfth monthly kist or instalment of Rs. 419/8/-in Sraban following.The lessees stipulated for themselves and their heirs to pay t...
Tag this Judgment!A.S. Subba Iyer Vs. Metal Corporation of India Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-04-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal169
P.B. Mukharji, J. 1. This is an interesting application in execution. It relates to the execution of the decree of the Madras City Civil Court transferred to this Court for execution. The important point raised is a point of limitation. The judgment-debtor contends that the decree is barred by limitation and cannot be executed. 2. A few facts may be very briefly set out in order to appreciate the point involved. The City Civil Court at Madras passed on the 6th. December, 1948, an ex parte decree for Rs. 4,000/- with interest and costs in favour of the applicant. Towards the end of December, 1948, an application was made by the judgment debtor to the City Civil Court for setting aside the ex parte decree. That was dismissed by the City Civil Court on the 24th August, 1949. As against this order dismissing the application to set aside the ex parte decree, the judgment-debtor appealed to the High Court at Madras on the 15th April, 1952. The High Court at Madras allowed the appeal conditio...
Tag this Judgment!West Jamuria Coal Co. Vs. Bholanath Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-04-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal424,58CWN31
Chakravartti, C.J.1. The petitioner, a company, is the defendant in a suit and prays for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against an order of this Court, passed in second appeal, by which the case was remanded to the Court of appeal below for disposal in accordance with certain directions given.It claims that the order is a final order and accordingly it is entitled to appeal as of right-under Clause (a) of Article 133(1) of the Constitution.Alternatively it claims that the case comes under Clause (c) and a certificate that it is a fit case for appeal ought to be granted. The argument advanced on the petitioner's behalf has raised certain fundamental questions as to the true scope of Article 133 and its relation to Sections 109 and 110, Civil P. C., as adapted to the Constitution.2. The suit concerned was brought by the opposite-parties as owners of a certain Touzi which had been created on the resumption of certain lands, previously held under an invalid: lakheraj grant. They clai...
Tag this Judgment!(Ka) Benoy Bhusan Mukherjee and ors. Vs. Bina Mukherjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-04-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal490,58CWN435
Renupada Mukherjee, J.1. In this appeal we are concerned with the ownership of a lottery ticket purchased by one Ramani Mohan Mukherjee in the name of his minor daughter Bina Mukherjee. The ticket was issued by the Calcutta Rangers Club and it won one of the 7 first prizes in the Derby Sweep held in England on the 4th of June, 1949. The amount of the prize was Rs. 47,176. After the results of the sweep were published, Ramani claimed the money, from the Rangers Club which advised Ramani to produce a certificate of guardianship regarding Bina Mukherjee because she, the registered holder of the ticket, was a minor. Some correspondence passed between the parties over this matter. Ramani failed to produce the certificate in question and the club refused payment. Thereupon, Ramani brought this suit for declaration of his exclusive right to the lottery ticket as also to the prize money described respectively in Schedules A and B of the plaint. 2. The principal defendant in the suit was minor ...
Tag this Judgment!Shah and Co. Vs. Ishar Singh Kirpal Singh and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-03-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal164
ORDERS.R. Das Gupta, J.1. This is an application for an order:(a) That the existence, effect and/or validity of the said alleged arbitration agreement and all questions relating thereto be decided and determined by this Court.(b) That it be declared that there was no valid, binding or effective or subsisting arbitration agreement between the parties or that the disputes and differences, if any, are referable to such arbitration.(c) That the said purported award dated 7th February 1949 be set aside.(d) Costs and incidental expenses be paid to the applicant.2. The facts necessary for me to determine the merits of this application, shortly stated, are as follows:3. On April 26, 1948, there was a contract between the parties. The sowda in respect of the said contract has been set out in Annexture 'A' to the petition. The said sowda contains amongst others the following term:'All sowdas subject to rules and regulations of the Calcutta Kirana Association whose decision is final and binding o...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »