Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1941All187
Braund, J.1. This is a first appeal from a decree of the Additional Civil Judge of Ballia. It raises a point of some little interest. The facts are comparatively simple. The plaintiff, Sheikh Ghulam Rashid, is the son of one Abdul Waheed who died on 15th March 1921 possessed of quite a substantial estate. Abdul Waheed left him surviving the plaintiff and four daughters. We are not concerned with the daughters in this suit, as they are not parties to it. At the date of his father's death, Sheikh Ghulam Rashid was a little boy of about six and ultimately he attained his majority on 2nd January 1933. Abdul Waheed, the plaintiff's father, had three brothers including one, I think he was the eldest brother, called Sheikh Abdul Ahad, who was defendant 1 to the suit and remained in that capacity until he died. Sheikh Abdul Ahad was actually the senior uncle of the plaintiff and it is common ground that he took possession, on the plaintiff's behalf, of the property comprising Abdul Waheed's es...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1941)1MLJ644
Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.1. This Full Bench has been constituted to decide the following questions:(1) Where a manager of a Hindu religious institution makes an alienation of the property of the institution for valuable consideration and the succeeding manager seeks to impeach that alienation by suit, will Article 134-B apply when there is an interval of time between the death, resignation or removal of the previous manager and the election or appointment of the subsequent manager?(2) If such succeeding manager happens to be a minor at the date of his election or appointment, will he be entitled to the benefit of Section 6 of the Limitation Act?(3) If Article 144 be held applicable to the case, when does adverse possession commence? Is it from the date of the election or appointment of the succeeding manager or from, the date of the death, resignation or removal of the previous manager who effected the alienation?2. The reference arises out of Appeal No. 26 of 1937, which was pre...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1941Cal582
Edgley, J.1. In this case a lady who describes herself as Noor Jehan Begum sues for a decree for the dissolution of her marriage with Eugene Tiscenko, a Russian subject, at present residing at Edinburgh in Great Britain. In the alternative, she asks for a declaration that her marriage with the defendant stands dissolved. The plaintiff's suit first appeared in the undefended list but, having regard to certain legal points of far-reaching importance which arise in connexion with this matter, I thought it desirable that the law relating to the case should be discussed in full, and I therefore asked Mr. S. M. Bose to appear as amicus curiae. He has been assisted by Mr. Clough and Mr. Das, and I am very grateful to these gentlemen for the help which they have given me in deciding this ease. In her plaint the plaintiff states that she is of Russian parentage and until recently was a Christian. She was born in Poland and, on 28th May 1931, was married in Berlin according to civil rites to the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1941Mad713; (1941)2MLJ834
1. This is an appeal from the order of the' learned Subordinate Judge of Amalapuram dismissing an application by a transferee decree-holder under Order 21, Rule 16 to recognise the transfer of the decree in his favour and to execute it against the judgment-debtor's property. The decree that was transferred was a decree for costs in favour of an undischarged insolvent. He obtained the decree after the order of adjudication under the following circumstances. The order adjudging the transferor insolvent was passed in 1923. On a mortgage executed by him before the adjudication a suit was instituted in 1927 being O.S. No. 1 of 1927 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Amalapuram. An ex parte decree was passed against him and he sought to set aside that decree. The learned Subordinate Judge who heard the application dismissed it on the ground that he had no right to present the application because he was an undischarged insolvent and the right to redeem vested in the Official Receiv...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1941Cal425
Derbyshire C.J.1. This matter was re-ported to me by Sen J. under Rule 3 of chap. V of the Rules of the Original Side of this Court on the ground that it involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Government of India Act, 1935. Under the rule just mentioned, I appointed this Bench to hear the matter. Put shortly the question is are certain provisions of the Bengal Money-lenders Act, 1940, an Act of the Bengal Provincial Legislature which received the assent of the Governor-General in July 1940 and came into force on 1st September 1940, by order of the Governor of Bengal beyond the law-making powers of the Bengal Legislature under the Government of India Act, 1935?2. The facts of the case are as follows : On 8th March 1933, Rai Bahadur Tarit Bhusan Roy, the father of the two plaintiffs, lent Rs. 50,000 to the defendant, Benoy Krishna Chakravarty. The loan was secured by an equitable mortgage of five properties in Calcutta the title deeds of which were deposit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1941Mad533; (1941)2MLJ41
ORDERAlfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.1. These three petitions all raise the question whether Section 4(1)(a) of the Madras Prohibition Act, 1937 is ultra vires the Provincial Legislature in so far as it relates to dangerous drugs. Section 4(1)(a) states that whoever imports, exports, transports or possesses liquor or any intoxicating drug shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to six months or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both. To the sub-section there is a proviso which says that nothing contained in the sub-section shall apply to any act done under, and in accordance with, the provisions of the Act or the terms of any rule, notification, order, licence or permit issued thereunder, but so far as dangerous drugs are concerned, the total prohibition imposed by the sub-section has been left unaffected.2. The petitioners reside in the North Arcot district of the Madras Presidency and have been convicted on charges framed under this sub-section of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1941Mad535; (1941)2MLJ148
Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.1. The assessee in this case is the muthavalli of a wakf called the Allajanathud-Deeniya, which was created by one Jamal Mohideen Sahib by a deed, dated the 21st December, 1923. The deed directs that half of the annual net income shall be utilised for the expenses of maintenance, education, marriage, funeral and other necessities of such members of the donor's family in the male line as in the opinion of the muthavalli are in poor and needy circumstances. The muthavalli himself is allowed to benefit from this portion of the net annual income if he also happens to be in poor and needy circumstances. The other half of the annual net income is to be utilised for such charitable purposes as (a) helping new converts to Islam by giving them religious instruction, (b) giving help to Muslim orphans, (c) giving secular, especially industrial and technical education to Muslims, (d) helping poor and needy Muslims of the Sunni sect, (e) spreading knowledge of the Isl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1941)43BOMLR742
John Beaumont, C.J.1. This is a reference made by the Commissioner of Income-tax raising a question which he was directed to raise by this Court under Section 66(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The question is:--Whether having regard to the objects of the Association and the manner in which they are carried out and the purpose for which its funds are applied the income of the Association is liable to income-tax and/or super-tax.2. The Association in question is the All India Spinners' Association. It was formed as an unregistered Association in the year 1925, and in the year 1937 it was registered under Act XXI of 1860. In the month of March 1938, notice was served on the assessees under Section 34 of the Act claiming that income had escaped assessment for the accounting year ending December 31, 1935, and at the same time notice was also served on the assessees under Section 22 claiming a return in respect of the accounting year ending December 31, 1936. So that the income with ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1941Mad817; (1941)2MLJ125
Patanjali Sastri, J.1. These petitions relate to the petitioner's claim to recover his costs, etc., in Privy Council Appeals Nos. 99 and 100 of 1933 in which a preliminary mortgage decree for Rs. 26,302-3-6 passed in favour of the petitioner was upheld by His Majesty in Council on the 26th September, 1936.2. The petitioner applied in C.M.P. No. 949 of 1939 in the lower Court for a final decree for the balance of the amount due under the preliminary decree after giving credit for amounts paid from time to time by the respondent judgment-debtor, and the latter filed LA. No. 506 of 1938 to scale down the decree under the Madras Agriculturists' Relief Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Both these applications were dealt with together and the learned Subordinate Judge finding that sums already paid by the respondent amounted to more than twice the principal amount of the debt after adjusting such payments towards all costs decreed to the petitioner including the costs now claimed dir...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1942Cal87
1. The facts which are not in dispute in these two appeals are these : A limited company named House of Labourers Ltd., was incorporated in the year 1926. Another Company named Steel Construction Co. Ltd., was incorporated in the year 1929. On 3lst December 1930, Probodh Chandra Chakravarty (the respondent in these two appeals) for self and on behalf of the House of Labourers Ltd., executed a promissory note for Rs. 10,000 with interest at 12 per cent. per annum with half yearly rests in favour of a company known as the Rice and Oil Mills Ltd., Comilla. On 15th December 1931, the Steel Construction Co., took over the assets and liabilities of the House of Labourers Ltd. and at about the same time the Rice and Oils Mills Co. was converted into a company called the New Standard Bank Ltd. (the appellant in these two appeals). On 23rd September 1932 an order was made by the original side of this Court for winding up of the Steel Construction Co., and a liquidator was appointed. On 28th Nov...
Tag this Judgment!