Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1897)ILR24Cal786
Maclean, C.J.1. The plaintiffs are merchants carrying on business at Calcutta and Serajgunge, the defendants are common carriers. Early in November 1893 the plaintiffs delivered to the defendants 432 drums of jute for carriage to Calcutta The frieght was duly paid and the goods were delivered on board the flat Khyber, which arrived in Calcutta about the 17th November 1893. The goods were carried Tinker the terms of an agreement contained in a forwarding note, dated the 14th October 1893. On the 7th December about midnight a fire broke out on the flat, which was then moored in the stream, about 40 feet from the shore, and connected with the shore by a staging which had been erected by the servants of the defendant Company and used for the purpose of discharging the cargo. The construction of the flat is accurately described by the learned Judge in his judgment in the Court below. I need not repeat what be says.2. The plaintiffs' jute was destroyed by the fire, and the question arises up...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1898)ILR25Cal512
Maclean, C.J.1. We are unanimously of opinion in this case that the conviction must be upheld. But as the point is of importance, we will reduce our judgment into writing.Maclean, C.J., O'Kinealy, Macpherson, Trevelyan and Jenkins, JJ.2. The accused in this case was tried before Mr. Justice JENKINS and a common jury on a charge of having fraudulently or dishonestly used as genuine a certain forged document, to wit. a document purporting to be a certificate of competency as an Engine-room First Tindal and purporting to be signed by one H. Abern, Chief Engineer of the Steam Launch Nicol, and being a forged document, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be a forged document, and that thereby he committed an offence punishable under Sections 465 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.3. The certificate in question purported to be a testimonial of service and good character.4. It seems that in accordance with the provisions of Act VII of 1884 and the regulations issued under that Act, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1897)ILR24Cal319
Banerjee and Rampini, JJ.1. The appeal is rejected....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1897)ILR24Cal360
Ghose and Gordon, JJ.1. The only question involved in this rule is what is the true construction of paragraphs 1 and 2 of Section 335 of the Calcutta Municipal Consolidation Act, Bengal Act II of 1888.2. The petitioner has been convicted under Sections 335 and 336 of the Act of keeping cows for profit in an unlicensed shed on the 20th and 21st May 1896, and has been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 50 and Rs. 1-8 as costs.3. Section 335 runs as follows:No person shall keep any animal for profit within Calcutta except in a place licensed by the Commissioners. Such license shall be taken out yearly before the first day of June in every year. The word 'animal' in this section shall include an elephant, camel, horse, mule, donkey, horned beast, sheep, goat and pig.The Commissioners in meeting shall determine the places where such animals may be kept, and the rules as to paving, drainage, water-supply, cubical space, light and other conditions, subject to which the license may be granted, and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1899)ILR25Cal572
Banerjee, J.1. This case was heard along with an appeal from Appellate Decree No. 759 of 1895. One of the grounds upon which the learned Vakil for the respondent sought to support the decision of the Lower Appellate Court that the matter in dispute in the former suit could not, by reason of its value being below Rs. 100, be taken up to the High Court in second appeal, whereas the matter now in dispute, being in value above that limit, a second appeal was allowed in this suit. We considered this ground untenable, holding that, even if the proposition of law, upon the assumed correctness of which it was based, was correct, it did not affect this case, as a second appeal in fact lay in the former suit. This is quite true as regards one of the two cases, namely, the appeal from Appellate Decree No. 759 of 1895; but it is as, has been shown to us now, not true with reference to the appeal from Appellate Decree No. 695 of 1895, the decision upon which the plea of res judicata is based in thi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1897)ILR24Cal418
Banerjee and Rampini, JJ.1. Upon the first point, the contention on behalf of the appellant is twofold, viz., that Section 539 does not contemplate a suit for the removal of any trustee; nor does it contemplate a suit against a third party, the object of the Section according to the appellant being only to authorize suits for obtaining certain reliefs specified in it when such suits are not brought adversely to the trustees for the time being; and it is urged that the Section is drawn upon the lines on which the English Statute known as Sir Samuel Romilly's Act, 52 George III, cap. 101, is drawn. In support of this argument the decision of a Full Bench of the Madras Court in the case of Rangasami Naickan v. Varadappa Naickan I.L.R. 17 Mad. 462 and the cases of Sheoratan Kunwari v. Ram Pargash I.L.R. 18 All. 227 and Lakshmandas Parashram v. Ganpatrav Krishna I.L.R. 8 Bom. 365 are relied upon.2. On the other hand it is argued on behalf of the respondents that Section, 539 is very differe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1897)ILR24Cal316
Ghose and Gordon, JJ.1. It seems to us that the legal effect of the order of the District Magistrate in this case is to acquit the accused of the offence under Section 147 of the Penal Code, and enhance the sentence under Section 379. If the accused have been rightly acquitted of the offence under Section 147, it follows that the sentence imposed under that section must fall through. And we are of opinion that the necessary consequence of the order of the District Magistrate maintaining the same sentence which the Deputy Magistrate had awarded is to enhance the sentence under Section 379 which he had no authority to do under Section 423, clause (b), sub-Section 3 of the Code of Criminal Procedure [see in this connection the decision of this Court, in Arpin Sheik v. Arobdi Datia.2. [318] The order of the District Magistrate enhancing the sentence from two to six months under Section 379 of the Penal Code will be set aside....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1897)ILR24Cal320
Ghose and Gordon, JJ.1. This case comes before us on a reference by the Sessions Judge of Hooghly under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and we have heard the learned Vakil who appeared in support of the reference. It appears that one Upendra Nath Bhuttacharjee preferred a complaint of criminal breach of trust under Section 406 of the Penal Code against certain persons, and this complaint was referred to the Police for enquiry by the Magistrate of Howrah. One of the witnesses whom the complainant wished to be examined by the Police in support of his charge was a lady named Monmohini Devi, and the Sub-Inspector of Police who was holding the investigation by an order in writing, required her to attend before him for the purpose of being examined as a witness in the case. She, however, failed to attend in accordance with his order, and accordingly the Sub-Inspector reported the matter to the District Magistrate, who eventually issued a warrant for her arrest and production b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1897)ILR24Cal324
Ghose and Gordon, JJ.1. The petitioners have been convicted by the Deputy Magistrate of Puri of offences punishable under Sections 147 and 353 of the Penal Code, and have been sentenced each to two months' rigorous imprisonment. On appeal the conviction and sentences have been affirmed by the Sessions Judge, The facts found by both lower Courts are that Janki Nath Basu, Special Excise Sub-Inspector of Puri, having received information that gurjat-ganja was concealed in the house of the petitioner, Jagarnath Mandhata, went to his house to search it, accompanied by certain Police Officers and Excise peons, and that he and his party were opposed by the petitioners and others in their attempt to search the house in question, and were at the same time assaulted. The main ground urged in support of the rule, which we granted on the application of the petitioners, is that, inasmuch as gurjat-ganja is a 'foreign excise-able' article as defined in Section 4 of Bengal Act VII of 1878 (as amended...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1898)ILR25Cal488
Maclean, C.J.1. A preliminary objection is taken by Mr. Jackson that this reference does not come within Section 42 of the Lower Burma Courts Act (Act XI of 1889), and consequently that we cannot hear it. We will deal with that objection. By the above section the Recorder of Rangoon, if he entertains any doubt upon any question of law, or of custom having the force of law, or as to the construction of any document, or the admissibility of any evidence affecting the merits, may, if he think fit, draw up a statement of the question and submit it to the High Court. In this case what has happened is this: Upon the point at issue in the case there are conflicting decisions of this Court with those of the High Courts of Madras and Bombay. Under these circumstances the position of the Recorder is clear. He is not bound by the decisions of the High Courts of Madras and Bombay, but he is bound by the decision of this Court. He should therefore have followed, as he was bound to follow, the decis...
Tag this Judgment!