Privy Council Court June 1940 Judgments

Mt. Har Naraini Kunwar Vs. Sajjan Pal Singh and Others

Court: Privy Council

LORD RUSSELL OF KILLOWEN: In order to explain the reasons why their Lordships think that this appeal should succeed, the barest statement of the relevant facts will be sufficient. One Jiwa Ram made his will dated 20th August 1890, by which after stating that being a member of a divided family he was the owner of the divided property specified below, he provided that (in the events which happened) his wife Hans Kunwar should "remain the owner in possession of the entire property left by me like a Hindu widow till her lifetime," and after her death all the married and unmarried daughters who be alive or whose male issue be alive shall get the estate acquired, i. e., the property in equal shares. At the end of the will were specified four items of property of which the first was described as ''ancestral property in mauza Isauli, pargana Jalisar district Etah-4 biswas out of 20 biswas." The other three items were non-ancestral property which had been acquired by the testator. The testator,...

Raneegunge Coal Association Ltd. Vs. Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd.

Court: Privy Council

Reported in: AIR1940PC151

LORD RUSSELL OF KILLOWEN: The point for decision on this appeal is the true construction of one clause in an agreement dated 16th January 1919 and made between the appellants and the respondents. By the agreement the appellants (called therein "the sellers") sell to the respondents (called therein "the buyers") the output of coal from certain seams in their collieries, for a period which commenced on 1st April 1921 and which has still a few years to run. The clause in question is cl. 4 which runs as follows : In the month of January immediately preceding the commencement of a year (which term shall for the purpose of this Agreement be deemed to mean a period of 12 calendar months commencing on the first day of April and ending on the thirty-first day of March) the price payable by the Buyers for the coal to be delivered during such year shall be settled and adjusted at eight annas per ton above the price payable under or in respect of the then latest contract for the purchase of first ...

Arjuno Naiko and Others Vs. Modonomohono Naiko and Others

Court: Privy Council

Reported in: AIR1940PC153

LORD RUSSELL OF KILLOWEN: This appeal is brought by some of the defendants to a suit in which one Modonomohono Naiko was the plaintiff. The suit, in form a suit for partition, was in reality brought for the purpose of establishing that the plaintiff, as the adopted son of one Horikrushno deceased, was entitled to succeed to the Sirdarship of Gondadharo which had been held and enjoyed by Horikrushno in his lifetime. After Horikrushno's death (which occurred on 5th April 1924), questions arose as to the succession, and as to whether the plaintiff was in fact the adopted son of the late Sirdar. The Revenue Divisional Officer reported adversely to the plaintiff's claim; but the Board of Revenue having considered the evidence then adduced, most properly thought that the question was too complicated for a Revenue Court to decide, and directed that the petitioner (i.e., the plaintiff) should establish his claim in a competent Civil Court. The present suit was accordingly instituted on 3rd Aug...

Bank of Khulna, Ltd. Vs. Jyoti Prokash Mitra and Others

Court: Privy Council

LORD THANKERTON: This is an appeal from a judgment and two decrees of the High Court of Judicature at Fort William in Bengal, dated 24th June 1936, which set aside a judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge of Khulna dated 29th September 1984, and dismissed the appellant's mortgage suit. The present suit was instituted by the appellant on 31st March 1930, for recovery of the principal and interest due under a mortgage deed dated 18th March 1925, executed by Nirod Bashini Mitra, a Hindu married woman, Bhuban Mohan Mitra, her husband, and Jnan Prokas Mitra, her eldest son, for a loan of Rs. 28,000, on the security of certain agricultural lands and a dwelling house, all of which belonged to Nirod Bashini Mitra in her absolute title. The original defendants were Nirod Bashini Mitra as defendant 1, her husband as defendant 2, and her eldest son as defendant 3. Defendant 1 died on 18th March 1932, and defendant 2 died on 22nd October 1933. They left three sons; the eldest son was defenda...

Raja Bahadur Sir Rajendra Narayan Bhanj Deo Vs. Commissioner of Income ...

Court: Privy Council

LORD JUSTICE LUXMOORE: The appellant was at the date of his assessment; for income tax for the year ending 31st March, 1932, the proprietor of an estate known as the Kanika Raj or Killah Kanika situate in and forming part of the tract of land formerly known as the Rajwara Orissa. This estate is hereinafter referred to as Kanika. The assessment was made by an order dated 11th March 1932, by the appropriate Income-tax officer. In making it the officer took into account certain sums accruing to the appellant by virtue of his ownership of Kanika from sources admitted to be non-agricultural. The appellant in due course appealed to the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax against this assessment upon the ground (among others) that all income which accrued to him by virtue of the ownership of Kanika was exempted from liability to income tax by virtue of a Treaty engagement, Kaoolnama, made on 22nd November 1803, by a predeceasor in title to Kanika with the Commissioners of the East India Comp...

John E. Brownlee Vs. Vivian Macmillan

Court: Privy Council

LORD THANKERTON: This appeal comes by special leave granted on 1st July 1937, from a judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada. By a majority of four Judges to one the Supreme Court allowed the respondent's appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court of Alberta (Appellate Division) dismissing her appeal from the judgment of Ives J. dated 2nd July 1934. The respondent and her father brought an action against the appellant under the Seduction Act, Chap. 102 of the Revised Statutes of Alberta, 1922, in which they severally claimed damages for the seduction of the respondent. The jury found in favour of both plaintiffs, awarding the respondent 10,000 dollars damages and her father 5000 dollars. Ives J., the trial Judge, expressed disagreement with the verdict of the jury, and subsequently, notwithstanding the verdict, gave judgment dismissing the action with costs, on the construction of the statute. He was of opinion that damage in the nature of loss of service, or at least of interference ...

Radhakissen Chamria and Others Vs. Durga Prosad Chamria and Another

Court: Privy Council

MR. M.R. JAYAKAR: The question for decision in this appeal is whether the holder of a certificate under the Bengal Public Demands Recovery Act (Bengal Act 3 of 1913) who has attached a decree passed in favour of his judgment-debtor and has applied under S. 19 of the Act for its execution, is competent, as the representative of the holder of the attached decree, to adjust such decree with the judgment-debtors thereof for a sum smaller than the amount of the decree. The statutory provisions requiring construction in this appeal are contained in O.21, R.2 and R.53, Civil PC, (Act 5 of 1908) and the said S. 19, of the said Act. O. 21 R. 2 is in these terms : (1) Where any money payable under a decree of any kind is paid out of Court, or the decree is otherwise adjusted in whole or in part to the satisfaction of the decree-holder, the decree-holder shall certify such payment or adjustment to the Court whose duty it is to execute the decree, and the Court shall record the same accordingly. (...

Samuel L. Levy Vs. Assicurazioni Generali

Court: Privy Council

LORD JUSTICE LUXMOORE: On 13th November 1936, the appellant entered into a contract of insurance against loss or damage by fire with the respondent company in respect of a stock of merchandise deposited in a warehouse situate in the commercial centre, Jaffa. The terms of the contract are embodied in a policy of insurance issued by the respondent company to the appellant. The only condition material to be considered in this appeal is condition 6. It is in the following terms: This insurance does not cover any loss or damage which either in origin or extent is directly or indirectly, proximately or remotely occasioned by or contributed to by any of the following occurrences or which either in origin or extent directly or indirectly, proximately or remotely arises out of or in connection with any of such occurrences, namely:- (1) Earthquake, volcanic eruption, typhoon, hurricane, tornado, cyclone or other convulsion of nature or atmospheric disturbance. (2) War, invasion, act of foreign e...

Bank of Chettinad Ltd., Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras

Court: Privy Council

SIR LANCELOT SANDERSON: This is an appeal from a judgment of the High Court of Madras dated 17th November 1938, which was given upon a reference of a question of law made to the High Court by the Commissioner of Income-tax under S. 66 (2), Income-tax Act 11, of 1922. The question was as follows : Whether on the facts of this case the income-tax authorities were entitled to hold that the income from the first six items of loans referred to in para. 21 of the Income tax Officer's assessment order accrued and arose to the Pudukottai Bank directly or indirectly through or from a business connection in British India within the meaning of S. 42 (1), Income-tax Act, between the Kanadukathan Bank and the Pudukottai Bank. The Commissioner of Income-tax submitted that this question should be answered in the affirmative. The High Court (consisting of Sir Lionel Leach C. J., Madhavan Nair and Varadachariar JJ.) decided that the submission of the Commissioner was right and answered the question in ...