Privy Council Court December 1934 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.
Sri Radha Krishna Thakurji and Another Vs. (Babu) Raghunandan Sinha an ...
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Dec-20-1934
Lord Thankerton: This is an appeal from a decree of the High Court of Judicature at Patna dated 18th November 1929 which reversed a decree of the Subordinate Judge at Darbhanga dated 26th January 1927 and decreed the plaintiffs' suit with costs. The present suit was instituted by the respondents on 30th April 1925, against the appellants for ejection of the latter from an area of land in village Samartha amounting to about 101 bighas, on the ground that the respondents had acquired a right of occupancy in the lands in suit under the Bengal Tenancy Act (Act 8 of 1885), and the question in issue in the present appeal is whether they had such a right at the date of the suit. It was conceded by the respondents before this Board that their claim to a right of occupancy depended on a lease of the lands in dispute (subject to a small exception referred to later) which was granted to them by the appellants in 1914, the terms of which are contained in a kabuliyat executed by respondent 1 who is...
Secy. of State Vs. Saroj Kumar Acharjya Choudhury and Others
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Dec-18-1934
Sir John Wallis: The appeal in this case, which now comes before the Board for the third time, is solely concerned with questions of the ascertainment of mesne profits under the decrees of the Subordinate Judge of Faridpore, of 22nd July 1907, which were restored, with a variation, which is not material, by the judgment of this Board of 2nd July 1917 after it had been set aside by the High Court. Four separate suits for possession and mesne profits had been instituted against the present appellant, Secretary of State for India in Council, by four sets of cosharers, each claiming a one-fourth share in the suit lands but three of these suits had been compromised while the decrees were under appeal to the High Court, and the present respondents are the plaintiffs in suit No. 17 of 1902, who were not parties to the compromise. The suit lands form part of an island chur which began to emerge out of the bed of the river Padma, a part of the Ganges, in 1888, and was taken possession of on beh...
(Babu) Mahadeo Prasad Singh and Others Vs. Karia Bharthi
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Dec-18-1934
Sir Shadi Lal: This appeal relates to a village khown at Saktni, which is situated in the District of Gorakbpur in the province of Agra. The village formed part of the estate annexed to the math of Kanchanpur in that District and was sold to the defendants, hereinafter called the appellants, on 1st March 1914, by one Rajbans Bharthi alleged to be the mahant of the math at that time. Rajbans died on 21st March 1916, and the present action was brought on 23rd February 1926, by Karia Bharthi, who claimed to be his successor as the mahant of the shrine. A large number of pleas were raised to defeat the suit, but there are only two questions which have been argued on this appeal: first, that the plaintiff was not entitled to maintain the suit; second, that the claim was barred by limitation. The facts of the case bearing on these questions do not admit of any real dispute. In April 1894, one Bachchu Bharthi, who was admittedly the mahant of the math, died, and two persons, namely Rajbans Bh...
Ejas Ali Qidwai and Others Vs. Special Manager, Court of Wards, Balram ...
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Dec-18-1934
Sir Shadi Lal: On 29th October 1914, one Asghar Ali and his cousin Muzaffar Ali granted a mortgage by conditional sale of the entire estate of Ambhapur, popularly known as the taluka of Gandara, and of certain other villages, to the then Maharaja of Balrampur for Rs. 9,20,000. The mortgaged property was situated in the District of Bahraich in the Province of Oudh, aud was fully described in a schedule attached to the instrument of mortgage. Asghar Ali died in January 1915, and his eldest son Iqbal Ali with Muzaffar Ali created in favour of the mortgagee, on 10th August 1915, a further charge on the same property for the sum of Rs. 2,16,425. The mortgagee brought an action to enforce his rights under both the deeds, and obtained, on 20th February 1922, a final decree for foreclosure. In execution of that decree he got possession of the property in April 1922. Thereupon the sons of Asghar Ali, other than Iqbal Ali, commenced the present action for the recovery of their share of the mortg...
Maharaja Srischandra Nandy and Others Vs. Baijnath Jugal Kishore (Firm ...
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Dec-14-1934
Lord Thankerton: These consolidated appeals consist of an appeal by the defendants 1 and 3 in the suit and a cross-appeal by the plaintiff from two decrees of the High Court of Judicature at Patna dated 21st May 1931, which subject to a slight modification, confirmed a decree of the Subordinate Judge of Dhanbad dated 30th July 1927. The plaintiff, who is a sub-lessee of the coal-mining rights of a part of Mouza Gararia, instituted the present suit on 28th May 1925, against the predecessor of the present defendant 1, who was a similar lessee of Mauza Ekra, which lies immediately to the south of Mauza Gararia, and defendants 2 and 3, who were in succession the agents of defendant 1 in working his coal, defendant 3 having succeeded defendant 2 in May 1924. The suit was based on the alleged conversion of an area of the plaintiff's coal, and he asked for an order on the defendant to vacate the land encroached on, for an injunction prohibiting future trespass and conversion, for an inquiry a...
L. Guran Ditta Vs. T.R. Ditta
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Dec-06-1934
Lord Atkin: These are two appeals from orders of the Court of the Judicial Commissioner, North-West Frontier Province, made in what may be hoped to be the final stages of a protracted litigation in the course of a family dispute. T.R. Ditta, now deceased and represented by the respondents, was the son of one Teku Ram, by a wife who predeceased him. His two brothers, Guran Ditta and Hari Chand, are the sons by another wife, Mt. Gujri, who Survived him and was a party to the litigation. Teku Ram, amongst other property, was entitled to a deposit of Rs.1,00,000 in the Alliance Bank of Simla, in the names of his wife, Mt. Gujri, and himself or either or the survivor. After his death the widow instructed the bank to pay to the appellant, Guran Ditta, which they did on 14th May 1921 the amount with interest, amounting to Rs.1,05,000. In August 1921, T.R. Ditta commenced a suit against the two brothers and Mt. Gujri claiming that the Rs.1,00,000 was part of the estate of Teku Ram, and claimin...
Kala Ram Vs. Punjab National Bank, Ltd., Peshawar
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Dec-06-1934
Lord Alness: These are consolidated appeals against the judgments and decrees; dated 22nd October 1932, of the Judicial Commissioners of the North-West Frontier Province, reversing the judgments and decrees, dated 2nd December 1931, of the Court of the Senior Subordinate Judge of Peshawar. In the first case, the Punjab National Bank, hereinafter termed "the plaintiff," filed a suit for Rs.10,242-11-2 on 11th March 1929, against four brothers, Relumal, Dharam Chand, Gurmukh Dass and Kala Ram, who were said by the plaintiff to have been customers of the Bank and to have incurred to it a debt of that amount. The debt was alleged to have been incurred after July 1928. In the second case, which was directed solely against the appellant, the plaintiff "sued for the balance of a loan account-viz., Rs. 6,887-the claim being based on a promissory note dated 8th June 1928. The main defence propounded by the appellant was that, on 5th October 1919, he ceased to be a partner in the firm of the fou...
Chunbidya and Others Vs. Emperor
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Dec-06-1934
Lord Atkin: This is an application for special leave to appeal from a judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. The question arose in this way. The petitioners were tried before the Divisional Sessions Judge at Cawnpore on a charge of murder, and they were in fact convicted of murder. It is unnecessary to go into the facts of the case except to say that the particular act of which they were found guilty was that, with other people, they assaulted the deceased and, after having beaten him severely, laid him down and cut off his foot with an axe and left him there to bleed to death. The Sessions Judge having convicted the petitioners of murder, sentenced them to transportation for life, and they thereupon appealed to the High Court. On appeal to the High Court the High Court, purporting to exercise their powers under the revision section (439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure), gave notice to the accused to show cause why the sentence should not be enhanced, and after hearin...
Nippon Yusen Kaisha Vs. China Navigation Co., Ltd.
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Dec-04-1934
Lord Macmillan: On 22nd March 1931 a collision occurred in the harbour of Hong Kong between the appellants' steamship " Toyooka Maru " and the respondents' steamship " Kiangsu." Each vessel blamed the other and cross-actions of damages, subsequently consolidated, were instituted by their respective owners against each other in the Supreme Court of Hong Kong. The trial Judge, Sir Joseph Kemp, C.J., found the " Toyooka Maru " solely to blame and his decision was affirmed by the Full Court on appeal. There were however considerable divergencies of view among the learned Judges below (and also apparently among the nautical assessors who assisted them) on certain aspects of the case. The learned Chief Justice, who sat as a member of the appellate Court, altered the opinion which he had reached at the trial and was ultimately in favour of holding both vessels to blame. The material facts are not complicated and are to a large extent common ground. It appears that the " Toyooka Maru " on the ...
C. Kasivisvanathan Chettiar Vs. S.V.S. Chokalingam Chettiar
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Dec-03-1934
Sir Sidney Rowlatt: This is an appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of the Straits Settlements (Settlement of Singapore), dated 14th September 1931, setting aside the judgment of Mills, J., delivered on 25th October 1930 and giving judgment in favour of the respondent. The suit was begun by writ issued on 9th March 1925 by S. Muthuraman Chettiar, suing as the administrator de bonis non of one S.V.S. Subramaniam Chetty deceased (herein called "the Intestate"). The respondent was substituted as plaintiff, suing in the same capacity, by an order dated 26th September 1928. As originally framed the suit was against E Kong Guan. The appellant was added as a further defendant by an order dated 7th September 1925. The claim against the appellant, with which alone this appeal is concerned, was to make him accountable for certain shares in a rubber estate called Leong Watt Hin Rubber Estate (afterwards converted into 1,250 shares in Leong Watt Hin Estate, Ltd.,) a...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›