Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Feb-18-1914
Reported in : AIR1914Cal704,24Ind.Cas.283
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs tenants in a suit instituted by them against their landlord under Section 106 of the Bengal Tenancy Act. The plaintiffs seek an amendment of the Record of Rights in so far as an entry has been made therein to the effect that they are liable to pay Rs. 32-1-4gundas as rent in respect of an area of 47 bighas and odd. The Special Judge has held that the rent payable by the plaintiffs is, as alleged by them, Rs. 18-9-12 gundas, but that they are also in occupation of land not comprised within their tenancy. On behalf of the tenants, it is contended that the Special Judge had no jurisdiction to hold that they are in occupation of excess lands and that the entry, as made by the Settlement Officer, should be amended by the substitution of Rs. 19-9-12 gundas for Rs. 32-1-4 gundas On behalf of the landlord respondent, it is contended, by way of cross-appeal, that inasmuch as it has been found that the tenants are in occupation of excess lands, the inferenc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Mar-17-1914
Reported in : AIR1915Cal482,(1915)ILR42Cal225
Mookerjee, J.1. Have you got the account books here showing the funds?]2. The receiver is in attendance here and says that these account books are in the lower Court.Mookerjee, J.3. How do you propose to get over the provisions of Section 16 of the Provincial Insolvency Act?4. All the property vests in the Receiver: see Lovell and Christmas v. Beauchamp [1894] A.C. 607.Mookerjee, J.5. Only the interest of the person declared insolvent vests in the receiver.]6. The Trustee in Bankruptcy takes four-fifths share, i.e., of the insolvents, and as receiver takes charge of one-fifth share of the minor till his status is decided in a title suit.Mookerjee and Beachcroft, JJ.7. These appeals are directed against an order under Section 16 of the Provincial Insolvency Act of 1907. The circumstances under which the order in question has been made may be briefly narrated. One Bhuban Mohan Mandal left five sons: Nil Ratan, Amulya Charan, Satya Charan, Fatick Charan and Sanyasi Charan. During his life...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jun-15-1914
Reported in : AIR1915Cal796,(1915)ILR42Cal652
Mookerjee, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs to enforce a mortgage security executed in their favour on the 9th June 1904. The history of the transactions between the parties prior to the mortgage may be briefly narrated. On the 24th July 1895, the plaintiffs advanced to the defendants a sum of Rs. 375 to carry interest at 24 per cent, per annum. On the 25th January, 1899, the defendants gave the plaintiffs a bond for Rs. 600 in renewal of the promissory note of the 24th July 1895. The bond carried interest at the rate of 75 per cent, per annum. In 1901, the plaintiffs sued to recover their money. The Court held that the plaintiffs should not be allowed interest at 75 per cent, per annum, and made a decree for the amount named in the bond with interest at 24 per cent, per annum. The amount decreed was Rs. 1,060 and this carried interest at 6 per cent, per annum till realization. On the 8th June 1903, the plaintiffs advanced to the defendants a sum of Rs, 300 on a promissory note...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jul-27-1914
Reported in : (1915)ILR42Cal690
Holmwood and Chapman, JJ.1. This appeal arises out, of a suit brought by the plaintiff to recover Rs. 1,300, being principal Rs. 80 and interest Rs. 1,220 on a mortgage bond executed by three defendants on 1st Jaishta 1312.2. The transaction was an unusual one, and the facts found require to be carefully stated as well as the circumstances which are admitted in connection with the giving of the mortgage bond and recited in the bond itself.3. It appears that Abdul Majeed, defendant No. 1, mortgaged 6 annas of a raiyati jote in which his brother, defendant No. 2, was also interested, while defendant No. 3, a relative, mortgaged three six-annas shares of jotes and an eight-annas share of n howla belonging exclusively to him.4. The three defendants had bid successfully at a sale of the land of one Nagorbashi Kundu and had deposited the earnest money. They were in immediate need of Rs. 80 to complete the purchase and applied to the former creditor of defendant No. 3, one Harish Chandra Pal,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jul-27-1914
Reported in : AIR1915Cal383,29Ind.Cas.843
1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff to recover Rs. 1,300 being principal Rs. 80, and interest, Rs. 1,220, on a mortgage bond executed by three defendants on 1st Jaistha 1312.2. The transaction was an unusual one and the facts found require to be carefully stated as well as the circumstances which are admitted in connection with the giving of the mortgage-bond and recited in the bond itself.3. It appears that Abdul Majid, defendant No. 1, mortgaged 6 annas of a raiyati jote in which his brother, defendant No. 2, was also interested while defendant No. 3 a relative, mortgaged three 6-anna shares of jotes and an 8-anna share of a howla belonging exclusively to him.4. The three defendants had bid successfully at a sale of the land of one Nagarbashi Kundu and had deposited the earnest money. They were in immediate need of Rs. 80 to complete the purchase and applied to the former creditor of defendant No. 3, one harish Chandra Pal who had a mortgage on properties Nos...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Dec-01-1914
Reported in : (1915)ILR42Cal856
Fletcher, J.1. The accused Atlanta, Nani, Shashi, Gopal, Srikanta and Bolai were tried along with seven others, who have been acquitted, with having committed the offence of dacoity.2. The trial took place before the learned Sessions Judge of Murshidabad and a Jury. The six appellants before us were convicted and each sentenced to undergo seven years' rigorous imprisonment. Against that conviction and sentence they have appealed to this Court. The principal point that has been argued on this appeal is as to the legality of the trial before the learned Sessions Judge. It appears that the accused Shashi was tendered and accepted a pardon under Section 337 of the Code of Criminal. Procedure, on the 21st of April 1914, whilst the proceedings were pending before the Committing Magistrate. The Magistrate subsequently forfeited the pardon granted to Shashi and the magisterial inquiry was recommenced from the stage at which it was interrupted as against Shashi by the tender and acceptance of t...
Tag this Judgment!