Kolkata Court May 1930 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.
Satis Chandra Mallik and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-1930
Reported in: AIR1930Cal705,129Ind.Cas.110
1. This rule was directed against an order for a complaint to be made against certain persons for the offence of perjury and kindred offences in connexion with the conduct of a proceeding Udder Section 145, Criminal P.C. The Magistrate made the order and the learned Sessions Judge has confirmed it.2. One ground that is taken is that having regard to the fact that in the proceeding under Section 145 it was held that it was not maintainable, the order of complaint was bad. There is no substance in this because the proceedings themselves were perfectly in order and were in no sense illegal, and therefore, the utmost that can be said is that it is a matter which might be considered as a possible element upon the question whether it was expedient in the interests of justice to make the complaint.3. Another ground is that the order should not have been made because the dakhilas in respect of which the offence is alleged were not material to the case. But that however does not appear to be in...
Prafulla Chandra Kharghoria Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-1930
Reported in: AIR1931Cal8,129Ind.Cas.356
Suhrawardy, J.1. In this case the appellant has been convicted under Section 477-A I. V. C, and sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 300 in default further rigorous imprisonment for one year. The only point which has been raised in this appeal is that the charge is bad under Section 234, Criminal P. C, and therefore the whole trial is vitiated by the defect in the charge. The charge framed by the committing Magistrate is in these words:That you on or about the dates between 1st March 1929 and 13th March 1929 at Digboi, being a clerk in employment tinder the Assam Oil Company Limited, wilfully and with intent to defraud, falsified certain papers and accounts to wit, the pay sheets of General Workshop and Bioilershop for the month of February 1929 (Ex. 3) by making false entries in respect of the aggregate sum of Rs. 400 in the totals under the column Nett Amount Payable, at pp. 3, 6, 11 and 13, viz:1. Us. 1937-10-0 for Rs. 1837-10-0 at p. 3.2. Us. 1180- 1-0 f...
Chairman of Municipal Commissioners of Dacca Vs. Mt. Hemangini Dasya a ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-1930
Reported in: AIR1931Cal129
Panckridge, J.1. This is a rule obtained by the plaintiff under Section 25, Prov. Sm. C.C. Act. The plaintiff petitioner is the Chairman of the Municipal Commissioners of Dacca. He instituted a suit against two ladies whereby he sought to realize a sum of Rs. 156-8-3 by way of rates and taxes. Defendant 1 contested the suit, the second did not. The defence which the learned Munsif discussed was that a former Chairman of the Municipality remitted the taxes and rates. It is a common ground that there was an assessment and valuation of the defendant's premises as required by the Municipal Act. It is said that thereafter owing to the defendants' poverty the Commissioners remitted the levy of the rate under Section 106, Municipal Act. I am not even clear from the learned Munsif's judgment that he was prepared definitely to come to a finding of fact that the remission on which the defendant relied had actually been made. But for the purposes of this rule I will assume that the defendant sati...
Akhla Kulla Chaudury and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-15-1930
Reported in: AIR1930Cal671
1. This rule has been issued on the ground that the petitioner not having been a party to any proceeding before the Magistrate who made the complaint against him under Section 476, Criminal P.C., the case instituted against him on such complaint should be withdrawn. The fact is that the petitioner was the Sub-Inspector of Gangajalbati Police Station in the District of Bankura. One Jugal Kishore Singh, a constable, lodged a first information report with the petitioner against certain persons charging one of them with escaping from his lawful custody and the others for rescuing him. This information was enquired into by a superior officer to the petitioner who found it to be false and concocted with the help of the petitioner and others. Mr. Bell, Superintendent of Police, Bankura, then lodged a complaint in Court under Section 211, I.P.C., against all the parsons concerned including the petitioner, Jugal Kishore riled a protest petition and the the case was enquired into and ultimately ...
Emperor Vs. Yar Muhammad
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-15-1930
Reported in: AIR1931Cal448
Costello, J.1. This is a reference by the Sessions Judge of Rajshahi in respect of the conviction of a man named Yar Muhammad who was found guilty of an offence under Section 189, I. P.C., and sentenced to a fine Rs. 50 and in default to rigorous imprisonment for two months. The allegation against Yar Muhammad shortly stated was this: he had a brother of the name of Kasim, who had been placed under police surveillance by an order of the Superintendent of Police, dated 2nd April 1929. That order was apparently made under the provisions of or rather the directions contained in Regn. 491, Clause (a), Bengal Police Regulations, 1927. The two brothers apparently lived in the same house though they occupied separate huts. On the night of 5th April 1929 somewhere about 1 a. m., two constables, named Sital Singh and Afzal Khan, came to the house and called out the name of Kasim. In so doing they were apparently carrying out the kind of duty referred to in Regn. 495, Clauses (b) and (g). Upon h...
Abdul Kuddus Gazi Vs. Mutual Indemnity and Finance Corporation (India) ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-1930
Reported in: AIR1930Cal576
1. We have examined the record in this case and having regard to the judgment of their Lordships of the Judicial Committee in the case of Chhatrapat Singh v. Kharag Singh A.I.R. 1916 P.C. 64, we are unable to say that the order made by the learned District Judge can be sustained. The petitioner, it appears to us has obviously brought his case within the four corners of the statute, namely the Provincial Insolvency Act and he was entitled to an order of adjudication as a matter of right. There is no question of abuse of the process of the Court. It may be that when the petitioner applies for discharge, his conduct during the time which will elapse between the date of the adjudication and the date of the application for discharge will have to be scrutinized and scrutinized carefully and whether an order for discharge should be eventually' made or not must depend on various circumstances which are independent of the circumstances brought to the notice of the Court by the insolvent when he...
Emperor Vs. Sashi Kanta De
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-1930
Reported in: AIR1930Cal754a
1. This case comes before us under Section 374, Criminal P.C., with regard to the trial of a man named Sashi Kanta De alias Saahi Barai in which the charges against the accused were under Section 302 and 397 I.P.C. The jury have arrived at a unanimous verdict of guilty, and the learned Judge agreeing therewith passed the sentence of death subject to confirmation by this Court.2. We have had the charge to the jury placed before us. The case was one in which it is alleged that the accused hadmurdered and robbed one Ram Golam Thakur as he was on his way home at about 8 o'clock one evening. It appears that the fatal blow was on the back of his head. The evidence of the prosecution shows that when he wa3 struck he called out with the result that certain persons came upon the scene and the deceased made a statement to them in the nature of a dying declaration mentioning who it was who had done him the injury. He was then removed to the house of Mahi Kanta Majumdar and he made a further state...
Madha Ram Gaonbura and anr. Vs. Mt. Tupoo Rubhani and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-1930
Reported in: AIR1931Cal319,129Ind.Cas.778
Panckridge, J.1. This is a rule obtained by the defendants in the following circumstances: An ex parte decree was obtained against them which they succeeded in having set aside by an order dated 17th December 1928. The suit came on for hearing on 17th January 1929 but was dismissed for default of appearance. On 7th March 1929 the plaintiff made an application under the provisions of Order 9, Rule 9, Civil P. C, that the order of dismissal should be set aside. The learned Munsif by an order dated 5th August 1929 set the order of dismissal aside as prayed. It is alleged that in so doing he has exercised his jurisdiction illegally and with material irregularity. It is also said that he was in error in coming to the conclusion that the petitioners before him had good and sufficient grounds for not making the application on a date prior to 7th March 1929. Now it is conceded that prima facie the application of 7th March was out of time. The article of the Limitation Act which applies to thes...
Sashi Kanta De Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-1930
Reported in: 129Ind.Cas.364
1. This case comes before us under Section 374, Criminal Procedure Code, with regard to the trial of a man named Sachi Kanta De alias Sashi Barai in which the charges against the accused were under ss. 302 and 397, Indian Penal Code. The Jury have arrived at a unanimous verdict of guilty, and the learned Judge agreeing therewith passed the sentence of death subject to confirmation by this Court.2. We have had the charge to the Jury placed before us. The case was one in which it is alleged that the accused had murdered and robbed one Ram Golam Thakur as he was on his way he me at about 8 o' clock one evening. It appears that the fatal blow was on the back of his head. The evidence of the prosecution shows that when he was struck he called out with the result that certain persons came upon the scene and the deceased made a statement to them in the nature of a dying declaration mentioning who it was who had done him the injury. He was then removed to the he use of Mani Kanta Majumdar and ...
Mohit Krishna Kundu Vs. Pranab Chandra Ghose and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-13-1930
Reported in: AIR1930Cal616
S.K. Ghose, J.1. The plaintiff sues for partition in respect of a tank and some lakheraj land. The contest is only with regard to the tank. It appears that a two annas share of the tank is at present held by defendant 1, and the remaining 14 as by the pro forma defendant 7. The plaintiff has obtained a permanent lease of 14 annas from defendant 7, and is building a house on the bank of the tank. In the plaint the plaintiff made an alternative prayer that if the division of the property cannot conveniently be made a direction might be given to the commissioner to compensate the party who might get less than what was due to his share. In his defence the defendant made a prayer that he should be allowed to purchase the share of the plaintiff in the tank. On 8th August 1927, when the suit was being heard, the plaintiff filed a petition offering to purchase the defendants' share.2. It also appears from the judgment of the trial Court that, in moving the petition, the plaintiff's pleader ask...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »