Kolkata Court July 1954 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.
Khetramohan Manimohon and ors. Vs. Parbaty Nath Dutta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-12-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal295
S.R. Das Gupta, J. 1. This is an appeal against an order of the SpecialBench of the Court of Small Causes refusing toentertain an appeal against an order of a Judgeof the Small Causes Court passed on an application purported to be an application under Section 47,Civil P. C.2. The appellant before us claims to be a subtenant in respect of premises No. 13, PagoapallyStreet, Calcutta. There was an ejectment decreeobtained by the landlords in the Court of theSmall Causes -against a tenant of the said premises. The landlords having obtained the decree for ejectment applied for execution. In the saidexecution proceedings an objection was filed bythe present appellant and others claiming to besub-tenants of the original tenant. The contention of the appellants and the other sub-tenants,was that by virtue of the provisions of the RentAct they had become direct tenants of the landlord and as such they are entitled to remain inthe premises as tenants. The learned Judge dismissed the application ...
Krishna Ranjan Basu Ray Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Representing Eastern ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-12-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Cal623
K.C. Das Gupta, J. 1. This Rule came up for hearing before Guha J. and he has referred it to a Division Bench. The suit was brought on the allegation that the plaintiff booked a consignment of torch-lights and batteries with the Bengal and Assam Railway on 16-11-1946 and that these were not delivered. The plaintiff brought a suit in a Barisal Court against the Governor General in Council as representing the Bengal and Assam Railway and obtained a decree. That decree was hit by the provisions of Indian Independence (Pakistan Court) Act (Act 9 of 1952) and thereupon the plaintiff brought a fresh suit against the Union of India in the Court of Small Causes at Sealdah. The question was raised that in view of the provisions of S. 8, Indian Independence (Rights, Property and Liabilities) Order, 1947, the Government of Pakistan is wholly responsible for any liability that may arise for breach of contract and that the Government of India has no liability. The relevant provisions of Section 8 a...
Sm. Ratan Mala Mondal and anr. Vs. Gopal Lal Daga and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-09-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal14,58CWN994
Mallick, J.1. This appeal arises out of a petition for execution of a decree obtained by some of the plaintiffs in a suit for specific performance. The facts leading to the present appeal may be stated asfollows:2. By an agreement for sale dated 19-12-1936, the defendants, who for convenience may be referred to as the Mandals, as vendors agreed to sell and convey to Sachindra Nath Goswami as purchaser of the land and premises referred to in the said agreement. On 5-6-1939, a suit for specific performance of the said agreement was instituted in the Court of 3rd Subordinate Judge of 24th Parganas against the said Mandate. The plaintiffs in the said suit are 5 Dagas and the said Sachindra Nath Goswami. It is pleaded in the plaint that Goswami entered into the said agreement with the Mandals for and on behalf of the Dagas as their agent and benamidar so that the real beneficiaries under the agreementare the Dagas and not Goswami. Needless to say that plaint bears the signature of all the D...
Sm. Charandasi Debi and ors. Vs. Kanai Lal Moitra and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-09-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal206
Guha, J.1. This appeal by defendant No. 1 Charan Dasi Debi arises out of a suit for partition of a residential house in Hooghly -- Chinsurah Municipality. In order to understand the case the following genealogical table will be helpful. RUDRA KANTA MAITRA | ________________________________________________________________ | | | Sarada Ramprasad Gopal | | | _________________________ Kusumkumari | | | ___________________________________________________ Debendra Purna | | | | =Charan Dasi | Atul Jagannath Siddheswari Annakali Defdt.1 Kanai(plff.) | | Defendant 11 to 14 Defendant 2 to 102. The disputed property belonged equally to the three brothers Sarada, Ramprasad and Gopal. Sarada died leaving his sons Debendra and Puma as heirs, Debendra being the elder. Ramprasad died leaving his daughter Kusum Kamari to inherit his share. Gopal had two sons, Atul and Jagannath as his heirs.3. The case of the plaintiff who is the son of Purna is briefly that his father and uncle Debendra lived as memb...
Juggilal Kamlapat Vs. General Fibre Dealers Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-08-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal354,59CWN146
Chakravartti, C.J.1. I have not found it altogether easy to decide this appeal, but the weight of authority compels me to take the view which I am taking, I would add that having had an opportunity to consider the 'matter more fully since we reserved judgment the day before yesterday, I cannot say that, after all, good sense may not be on the side of that view.2. The appeal is against an order of S.R. Das Gupta, J., dated 25-5-1953, by which the learned Judge set aside an award in favour of the appellants on the ground that the arbitrators had mis-conducted themselves in proceeding against the respondents ex parte and in refusing to give them a proper opportunity for presenting their case. Such being the scope of the appeal, the dispute which was referred to arbitration is not of much consequence, Nevertheless, the facts may be stated in outline.3. It appears that on 29-8-1951, the appellants Messrs. Juggilal Kamlapat, agreed to sell and the respondents, the General Fibre Dealers Limit...
Bharat Construction Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-07-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Cal606
Chakravartti, C.J. 1. The Bharat Construction Co. Ltd., now in liquidation, have appealed against an order of S. R. Das Gupta J., dated 16-2-1953, by which the learned Judge stayed a suit brought by them in exercise of his powers under Section 34, Arbitration Act. The stay was resisted on the ground that the arbitration agreement upon which the respondent was relying had become infructuous, inasmuch as no arbitrator, answering the description given in the agreement, was or could any longer be available. That argument did not appeal to the learned Judge who rejected it and ordered a stay of the suit.2. The facts are simple. It appears that in 1944, the then Government of India called for tenders for the construction of certain structures intended for military purposes and a tender was submitted by the appellants on 26-4-1944, and accepted on the 12th of May following. The work was to be carried out in accordance with the terms and conditions of Contract Form No. I.A.F.W-2159 and the ame...
Sm. Sonia Parshini Vs. Sheikh Moula Baksha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-06-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal17
Debabrata Mookerjee, J.1. The question raised in this appeal is whether a deed of sale executed by an illiterate woman without the benefit of independent advice is subject to the same jealous scrutiny of the Court as an instrument executed in similar circumstances by a pardanashin lady strictly so-called.2. The plaintiff who is the appellant before us instituted a suit out of which this appeal arises for a declaration that a kobala (Ex. 3), dated 10-8-1943, executed by her purporting to transfer to the defendant her homestead land with structures thereon, was invalid, inoperative and unenforceable in law. The allegation is that as a result of undue influence brought to bear upon her by the respondent and the misrepresentation and fraud practised by him, she had been induced to execute the impugned document without knowledge and understanding of its contents.3. The case made by the plaintiff appellant is that having been left a sonless widow five years ago she inherited her husband's pr...
Bijanlata Bassak Vs. Bhudhar Chandra Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-06-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal578,59CWN639
K.C. Das Gupta, J. 1. These two Rules came up for hearing before Chunder J. and have been referred by him to a Division Bench. 2. The only question which arises for consideration in these Rules is whether there is any reason to interfere with the order of the court of appeal below rejecting an application under Section 5, Limitation Act for extension of time for filing the appeals. It appears that both the appeals were filed by the landlord against orders passed on 26-8-1950 on applications for fixation of rent by a tenant. The memorandum of one appeal was filed on 5 9-1950 and that of the other was filed on 16-9-1950, but in both cases without any copy of the order appealed from. The copies of the orders were filed as late as 10-7-1953 and at the same time applications were filed in both the cases for condoning the delay. The learned court below has dismissed these applications. It was of the opinion that Section 5, Limitation Act did not apply to appeals under the West Bengal Premise...
Fakir Shaikh Vs. Syed Ali Shaikh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-05-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal349
Guha, J.1. This appeal by defendant 1 Fakir Shaik arises out of a suit for pre-emption under the Muhammadan Law instituted by the plaintiff Syed Ali Shaik. The relevant facts are as follows: Defendant 2, Meser, and defendant 3, Tinkari who are sons of one Niyamat Shaik are cosharers in respect of a certain holding and by a registered kobala they sold out their share in the holding to defendant 1, on 3-3-1947. The plaintiff's case, is that on the next day, that is, on 4-3-1947, while the plaintiff was catching fish from the 'doba' in suit, Abdul Gani, son of defendant 1, came up and demanded his share of fish disclosing the purchase by defendant 1. According to the plaintiff, he immediately performed talab-i-mowasibat disclosing his intention to assert the right of pre-emption and thereafter without delay he went to the house of defendant 1, and performed the second demand, namely, talab-i-ishhad in the presence of witnesses according to the formalities required by the Muhammadan Law.2....
Akhileswar Saha Pramanick Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-02-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal297,59CWN240
S.R. Das Gupta, J. 1. This is an appeal against an order of Shri G. P, Mukherjee, District Judge of Nadia, dismissing art application of the appellant for Letters of Administration to the estate of one Manua Khepa Baba deceased.2. The appellant claims to be a creditor of the deceased Manua Khepa Baba. His claim is for the sum of Rs. 4325/-, due qn a hat chita. It appears that the said Manua Khepa Baba died at Benares on 21-10-1949. He had no heir and he left no Will. So under the law of the land his estate would escheat to the Government. The deceased left properties in the districts of Nadia and Burdwan. After his death as nobody applied for Letters of. Administration, the appellant on 16-6-1950 made the present application for grant of Letters of Administration to the estate of the deceased. The application was made on the footing that the applicant was a creditor of the said Manua Khepa Baba.An objection to the said application was filed by State of West Bengal. In the written state...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›