Kolkata Court March 1931 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.
Harendra Nath Sen Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-11-1931
Reported in: AIR1931Cal441
S.K. Ghose, J.1. The appellant Harendra Nath Sen has been convicted under Sections 457 and 380 read with Section 75, I. P.C., and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. The prosecution case is that on the night of 15th February last year there was a burglary in premises No. 3, Harrison Road and a large number of articles worth about Rs. 20,000 was stolen. The police took charge, among other things, of a hasp of a trunk, a plate, a thali and a house-breaking instrument as they were alleged to contain finger impressions. The case for the prosecution is that the finger impression on the hasp of the trunk is identical with the left thumb impression of the appellant Harendra, which was found on the fingerprint slip kept in the Finger-print Bureau. That led to the arrest of the appellant. One Deb Sankar was similarly traced from a finger impression and both men were put upon their trial before the Chief Presidency Magistrate, with the result that they were convicted, Haren...
Radha Nath Chakrabarti Vs. Nagendra Nath Chakrabarti and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-11-1931
Reported in: AIR1931Cal806
Jack, J.1. This appeal has arisen out of a suit to recover half the share of the money alleged to be due on a registered mortgage bond executed by one Krishna Lal Chakravarty in favour of Bhudar Chakravarty in 1919. Plaintiff and defendant 3 are the successors of Bhudar and defendants 1 and 2 are successors of Krishna. The suit was de-decreed in full as against defendant 1, in the trial Court but in the lower appellate Court it was decreed for half the amount, namely Rs. 81-9-0 as against defendant 1, and dismissed as against defendant 2 in as much as it was held that defendant 2 was not properly represented in the suit.2. The principal point raised in this appeal is that a suit for half-share of the money due on the mortgage is not maintainable. It is next urged that additional evidence should not have bean taken after the arguments on both sides have been heard. As to the second point there is not much substance. The additional evidence consisted of a statement of the plaintiff as to...
Akabbar Ali and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-10-1931
Reported in: AIR1931Cal642
Cuming, J.1. This rule has been granted on the application of the four petitioners on the following facts : The four petitioners were convicted by a Magistrate of the first class under Section 447, I. P.C. and each sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 40 under that section. Petitioners 1 and 2 were further convicted under Section 323, I. P.C., and each sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 40 under that section also. All the four petitioners appealed to the Sessions Judge. The learned Sessions Judge holding that no appeal lay dismissed the appeal. They then moved this Court and have obtained the rule on the ground that an appeal does lie.2. The learned advocate for the petitioners has put the case as follows: Section 408, Criminal P.C., granting a right of appeal to any person convicted by a Magistrate of the first class to the Court of Sessions makes no mention of sentence. The only restriction on this right of appeal will be found, it is argued, in Section 413, Criminal P.C., in which it is said ...
In Re: Apurba Krishna Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-10-1931
Reported in: AIR1931Cal801a
Panckridge, J.1. This is an application on behalf of the Karnani Industrial Bank which is a creditor to the extent of Rs. 53,000 that the public examination of the insolvent Apurba Krishna Roy be reopened.2. The application appears to be extraordinarily belated. The adjudication order was made on the petition of a creditor on 8th May 1928, and the public examination was begun and concluded on 14th April 1930. It is stated on oath that notice of such examination was duly given to the present applicant as provided for by Section 27, Sub-section 1, Presidency Towns Insolvency Act. There is no denial that notice was not served upon the accredited representative of the bank and I must proceed on the footing that the examination of the insolvent was in fact held upon notice to the bank. There after there was correspondence between the bank and the Official Assignee where the bank stated that they were contemplating an application for reopening the public examination of the insolvent. No appl...
Burdwan Electric Supply Co. Vs. Srimati Kumud Kumari Choudhury and ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-09-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Cal14
Graham, J.1. These appeals are by the defendant, the Burdwan Electric Supply Company and arise out of suits brought by the plaintiffs now respondents, for a declaration that the defendant company cannot charge at a rate exceeding six anna per unit with a rebate of 10 per cent, if bills are paid within ten days of their presentation, and with a further special rebate of one anna per unit for house wiring done by the company; also for a declaration that the defendant company cannot get any kilowatt charge, or impose anything more than the above rate, and for an injunction restraining the company from cutting off electric connexion and from discontinuing the supply of electric energy.2. The circumstances which resulted in the institution of the suits are shortly as follows: The plaintiffs-respondents are rate-payers of the Burdwan Municipality, and are the owners of certain holdings situate within that Municipality. The defendant company applied to Government in 1920 for a license to supp...
Surya Kumar Mitra and ors. Vs. Munshi Noabali and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-09-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Cal289,136Ind.Cas.871
Mitter, J.1. The question which arises in this rule relates to the new provisions of Section 26 (p), Ben. Ten. Act, as amended by-Act 4 of 1928. This case illustrates one of the difficulties which arises in the working of the provisions of the Act. With great respect to the legislature I think that it seems to have left much that ought to have been stated for clarifying the provisions of the Act. In this case it appears that an occupancy holding was sold in execution of a money decree and was purchased by the decree-holder. The decree-holder had notices served on some of the cosharers landlords whom he named in the notices as contemplated by Section 26 (e), Clause 4 of the amended Act. He issued notices on five of the tenure-holders who were the immediate landlords of the raiyats whose occupancy holding had been sold by the compulsory sale. It is said that there are about 30 tenure-holders who are the immediate landlords of the raiyats. An application was made on 16th April 1930 by eig...
Meher Sheikh and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-09-1931
Reported in: AIR1931Cal414
S.K. Ghose, J.1. The three appellants in this case have been convicted under Sections 448 and 323, I.P.C., and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under each section, running consecutively in the case of each of the appellants.2. The prosecution case is that on the night of 29th June last year there was a dacoity in the house of one Gobinda Mondal of Godda. Five of the dacoits went into the house and they were all recognized. Gobinda and his wife Pabitra were assaulted. The woman was pressed to state where her things were and one of the dacoits tried to snatch away an ornament from her waist, but this was not successful. Ultimately the dacoits ran away. The defence was that there was no such occurrence and the accused were being prosecuted on account of ill-feeling. The three appellants and two others were put upon their trial on a charge under Section 395, I. P.C. The learned Sessions Judge in his charge to the jury made certain references to Sections 448 and 323, ...
Jogesh Chandra Roy Vs. Surendra Mohan Roy Chaudhuri
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-09-1931
Reported in: AIR1931Cal637
S.K. Ghose, J.1. This rule is directed against an appellate order of acquittal on charges under Sections 193, 192 and 211, I. P.C., and it was issued on three grounds. The first ground is that the judgment having been written and signed by the learned Judge Mr. Ellis when he had ceased to have jurisdiction in the district of Tipperah, was ultra vires and illegal, and it could not be legally delivered by Mr. B. N. Mitra, and was as such wholly inoperative in law. The judgment purports to be signed by Mr. T. H. Ellis on 24th July 1930. But towards the end of the judgment it is stated as follows:I must hero observe that the decision of this appeal involved the reading of a considerable volume of evidence and several police diaries. I finished hearing the appeal in the afternoon of 19th July. I was then under orders of transfer to Dacca, and actually made over charge of my post as District Judge of Tipperah on 21st July 1930. I had no time to write this judgment before my departure; so I h...
H.V. Low and Co. Ltd. Vs. Sudhanna Kumar Chakravarti and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-09-1931
Reported in: AIR1931Cal791
Rankin, C.J. 1. In my opinion, the judgment of the learned Judge is right. The instrument before us is a promissory note. It is payable, in the first place, to Haridas Banerjee. It is also payable to 'bearer' and it is payable 'on demand.' In my judgment, the learned Judge was right in holding that it is hit by Section 25, Paper Currency Act (10 of 1923). That section is taken from the Bank Charter Act, 1844 (Sir Robert Pool's Act), where a similar provision was made, not however with reference to 'any person,' but only with reference to banks. It was part of the prohibition of issuing bank notes except so far as regards certain banks who by that statute were permitted to continue to issue. By the Indian Act:no person in British India shall draw, accept, make or issue any bill of exchange, hundi, promissory note or engagement for the payment of money payable to bearer on demand.2. In this case although the name of Haridas Banerjee is on the face of the instrument, it is an instrument t...
Krishna Das Roy Vs. Charulata Pal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-06-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Cal290,137Ind.Cas.31
Rankin, C.J.1. In my opinion, this appeal must be allowed. The debtor has raised a contention which I should think requires some considerable investigation as to whether he has really been within six months prior to the presentation of the petition a resident within the jurisdiction of the Court. Assuming however that he has been and that there is no difficulty on that score, I find that this petition alleges three acts of insolvency. One is a verbal notice of suspension of payment of debts--on a date which is not given at all. The second is keeping house and concealing himself to avoid meeting his creditors, no date is given; and the last is that he has disposed of a considerable portion of his properties and is trying to dispose of the rest. As regards the second part, I do not quite know whether that is supposed to be an act of insolvency; but as regards the first part, there is no indication of the date and there is no indication of what property or to whom. The proper thing to do ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »