Kolkata Court June 1971 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.
Jogendra Nath Chatterjee and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-11-1971
Reported in: AIR1971Cal458,75CWN737
Amiya Kumar Mookerji, J. 1. These two appeals are by the referring claimant and they arise out of a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The lands acquired were C. S. Plots Nos. 1402 and 1422 forming the subject-matter of F.A. 346/66, and C.S. Plot No. 1509, which is the subject-matter of F.A. 347/66, situate in mouja Gopinathpur in the district of Burdwan. The Land Acquisition Collector awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- per acre with respect to plot No. 1402 as began land, for plot No. 1422 at Rs. 60/- per acre as Road, and Rs. 710/- per acre for plot No. 1509 as danga land. The claimant was dissatisfied with the Collector's award and took a reference before the Land Acquisition Judge. In the petition of reference the claim appears to have been made for Rs. 12,000/- with respect to the began land and Rs. 24,000/- for the danga land, on account of the potential value of the lands. The learned Land Acquisition Judge affirmed the Collector's award and rej...
Chhabilal Singha and ors. Vs. Jharulal Singha and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-08-1971
Reported in: AIR1971Cal540
M.M. Dutt, J.1. This Is a defendants' appeal and it arises out of a suit for partition and accounts.2. The plaintiff No. 1 is the father and the plaintiff No. 2 is the son. The suit was filed by the plaintiffs against the defendant No. 1 the brother of the plaintiff No. 1 and the sons of the defendant No. 1 being defendants Nos. 2 to 7. The wife of the defendant No. 1 was impleaded in the suit as pro forma defendant No. 8. The parties are governed by the Mitakshara School of Hindu Law. It was alleged by the plaintiffs that out of items Nos. 1 to 27 of immovable properties mentioned in the schedule 'ka' in the plaint, some were ancestral properties of the plaintiff No. 1 and the defendant No. 1 and some were acquired after the death of their father with the ioint family fund. It was further alleged that items Nos. 28 and 29 were acquired by the defendant No. 1 with the joint family fund in the benami of his son and wife respectively. The plaintiffs alleged that these two items of proper...
Biswanath Chatterjee Vs. Ajit Kumar Sarkar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-07-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Cal52
Salil Kumar Datta, J.1. This is defendant-tenant's appeal against a concurrent judgment, decreeing plaintiff's suit for recovery of possession. The plaintiff's case is that he is the owner of premises No. 11-D, Monoharpukur Road and the defendant had been a tenant under him in respect of Suit No. 1 in the ground floor thereof at a rental of Rs. 75/- per month and pump charge of Rs. 5/- per month, the tenancy being according to English Calendar month. The defendant became defaulter in payment of rent from November 1966 as alleged deposits with the Rent Controller were invalid. It was alleged, that the defendant was guilty of conduct which was a nuisance or annoyance to neighbours including the landlord as he forcibly prevented landlord's men from using a passage leading to the pump room and inspecting the reservoir of water which supplied water to seven flats of the said premises and if the pump and motor were damaged supply of water to tenants would be curtailed. It was alleged that th...
Mofazzel Mondal and anr. Vs. AnachhaddIn Sardar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-07-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Cal74,76CWN156
Salil Kumar Datta, J. 1. This is the defendants' appeal against the judgment oi concurrence decreeing the plaintiffs' suit for declaration of title and joint possession. The plaint case is as follows : The suit property is comprised In Dag No. 1973 in Khatian No. 46 measuring 60 acres in P. S. Hanskhali in District Nadia. The suit land was settled by the landlord in 1926 by registered pattah to Moala Bux and Mahiruddi Mondal. The defendants are the heirs and legal representatives of Mahiruddi. After the death of Moala Bux his brother Jalil Mondal andon his death Fakir Chand inherited the property and had been in joint possession. Fakir sold the suit property to the plaintiffs by a kobala dated August 13, 1956, but as the plaintiffs went to take possession, they were prevented from taking possession by the defendants. Accordingly, the suit was filed on August 20, 1956 by the plaintiffs for a declaration of their 8 annas title and ioint possession with the defendants. 2. The suit was con...
Madhusudhan Debnath Vs. Sm. Radharani Mondal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-07-1971
Reported in: AIR1971Cal534
M.M. Dutt, J. 1. This Rule is directed against an order dated September 4, 1968, of the Munsif, Additional Court, Krishnagar striking out the defence of the petitioner against delivery of possession under Section 17 (3) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956.2. The landlords-opposite parties instituted the suit for ejectment against the tenant-petitioner on the ground of default in payment of rent since Falgoon 1370 B. S. The petitioner entered appearance in the suit on March 12, 1968, and filed a written statement on May 20, 1968. In his written statement the petitioner denied that he was a defaulter in payment of rent as alleged. The case of the petitioner was that he spent a sum of Rs. 150/- for the repairs of the suit premises which is a shop room. It was alleged by the petitioner that there was an agreement between the petitioner and the opposite party No. 2 that the petitioner would repair the suit premises and that the money that would be spent by the petitioner for repai...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›