Privy Council Court December 1941 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.
Kumar Chandra Singh Dudhoria and Others Vs. Midnapore Zemindary Co. Lt ...
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Dec-18-1941
LORD THANKERTON: This consolidated appeal arises out of two suits instituted by the appellants, claiming arrears of rent from the respondents for two successive periods of three years in respect of the lands belonging to touzi No. 3653 of Murshidabad Collectorate. The Subordinate Judge granted two decrees dated 17th September 1935, in favour of the appellants, but these were reversed by two decrees of the High Court of Judicature at Fort Willam in Bengal dated 27th and 29th July 1938, from which the appellants now appeal. The appellants are the proprietors of touzi No. 523 of the Murshidabad Collectorate and the respondents hold a patni taluk comprising some villages in that estate under a patni patta executed by the appellants' predecessors-in-interest in favour of the respondents' predecessors on 5th November 1866, at a rent fixed in perpetuity of Rs. 5483-5-11 per year. The estate bearing touzi No. 3653 consists of alluvial land situated on the bank of the Ganges in an old bed of th...
Bhuru Mal Vs. Jagannath and Others
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Dec-18-1941
SIR GEORGE RANKIN.- CHART This appeal is brought by defendant 1 to a partition suit. The appellant Bhuru Mal is the only son of Ram Gopal, who died in September 1932 and plaintiff 1 is his uncle Jagannath, whose two sons are also plaintiffs. The appellant's co-defendants are his uncle Gulzari Mal and Lallu Mal, the latter's son. The plaint claimed partition of the property comprised in seven schedules or lists lettered A to G. By one of the two decrees now under appeal which were passed by the Chief Court of Oudh on 29th September 1937, partition of the whole of this property has been directed. The Chief Court varied the decree which had been made on 22nd December 1934, by the trial Court, the Subordinate Judge of Partabgarh, both as to the plaintiffs' share and as to the assets to be divided. They held the share of the plaintiffs to be a one-third share and not an eighteenth share as the trial Court had declared in respect of all save one (item 2 of List A) of the items which it had i...
Secretary of State Vs. Srimath Vidya Sri Varada Thirta, Swamigal and O ...
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Dec-18-1941
SIR GEORGE RANKIN: This case comes from the Ambasamudram taluk in west of the Tinnevelly district of Madras. In this taluk are the principal sources of the Tambraparni river, and its irrigation system is both ancient and extensive. Numerous anicuts or dams cross the Tambraparni and its affluents, supplying channels and tanks in a manner which is acknowledged to reflect the highest credit upon the skill and energy of the ancient governments who constructed them. The two suits out of which this appeal arises were brought in the Court of the District Munsif of Ambasamudram against the Secretary of State for India in Council for recovery of certain sums paid as water cess under the Madras Irrigation Cess Act (Madras Act 7 of 1865). Both suits had reference to the village of Vagaikulam in Tinnevelly, and the plaintiff in each case was a lessee from the head of a math situated in Mysore which claims to have held the village ever since 1753. The first suit was numbered 412 of 1921 and was bro...
Khaw Joo Jeang Vs. Khaw Joo Chye and Others
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Dec-12-1941
LORD ROMER: By a settlement dated 10th April 1905, certain property, both moveable and immoveable, forming part of the residuary estate of one Khaw Soo Cheang, deceased, was transferred by his then surviving executors to themselves and four other persons as trustees upon trust during the lives of the 16 persons therein named (several of whom are still living) and the life of the survivors and survivor of them and for 21 years after the death of such survivor to collect the rents, profits and other income of the property so conveyed. Out of such income after payment thereout of the cost of necessary improvements and repairs and other outgoings the trustees were to expend the sum of $4,080 annually for certain purposes therein specified and were then to divide the surplus income into two equal shares. Of these two shares, one was to be held upon certain trusts for the male members of the 6 branches of the family of Khaw Soo Cheang. With the trusts affecting that share the present appeal ...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bihar and Orissa Vs. Maharajadhiraja Sir K ...
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Dec-12-1941
LORD THANKERTON: In connection with the assessment of the profits and gains of his business as a moneylender for the year 1931-1932, the respondent claimed the deduction of rupees 2,07,018 expended in the year of account, as an allowance admissible under S. 10 (2) (ix) Income-d tax Act, 1922. The respondent's claim was rejected by the Income-tax Officer, the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, and the Commissioner of Income-tax, the last of whom, at the request of the respondent, made a reference under S. 66 (2) of the Act to the High Court of Judicature at Patna, which decided the reference in favour of the respondent by a judgment dated 17th October 1939, against which the present appeal has been taken by the appellant. The relevant provisions of S. 10 of the Act are as follows : "10 - (1) The tax shall be payable by an assessee under head 'Business' in respect of the profits or gains of any business carried on by him. (2) Such profits or gains shall be computed after making the fo...
Esmail Lebbe Marikar Ebrahim Lebbe Marikar Vs. Bartlect and Company
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Dec-05-1941
LORD ATKIN: This is an appeal from the Supreme Court of Ceylon, (Poyser and Wijeyewardena JJ.), who affirmed a decree of the District Judge of Colombo in favour of the plaintiffs in an action on a mortgage bond. The defence was that the sum mentioned in the bond was an amount due as the result of wagering transactions on the price of rubber. There has been no dispute at any time in the present action that in accordance with the law of Ceylon as decided in the Supreme Court in (1934) 36 New Law Reports 145, (1) such a plea if established would be a valid defence. The only question in the case is one of fact, whether the transactions between the parties were wagering transactions, in other words, were bets. Both Courts decided this issue in favour of the plaintiffs in judgments which fully discuss the facts, and it is only necessary shortly to state the circumstances which gave rise to the action. The defendant is a grower of rubber in Ceylon: the plaintiffs are a long-established firm o...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›