Kolkata Court January 1932 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.
Satish Chandra Banerjee Vs. Munilal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-04-1932
Reported in: AIR1932Cal821
Rankin, C.J. 1. In this ease the plaintiff appeals from the judgment of my learned brother Panckridge, J., dismissing his suit. It seams that the defendants brought a suit against the present plaintiff at Amritsar claiming a sum of about Rs. 4,000 and, in December 1928, they applied to the learned Subordinate Judge at Amritsar for an order under Order 38 of the Schedule to the Civil Procedure Code, namely, for an order for attachment before judgment. The learned Subordinate Judge made the order for attachment before judgment ex parte as these orders invariably are, and, on 11th January 1929, the order having been transmitted to Calcutta for execution, the present plaintiff's Calcutta shop with the articles therein was attached. The present plaintiff thereupon paid the necessary amount of money into Court, and on 14th January 1929, the attachment was in that way released. Thereupon the present plaintiff continued defending the suit at Amritsar and denied that he was under any liability ...
YasIn Moral Vs. Isaf Khan
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-04-1932
Reported in: AIR1932Cal867,140Ind.Cas.873
Mitter, J.1. The present Rule is directed against the conviction and sentence passed by the Union Bench under the provisions of the Village Self-Government Act (Bengal Act 5 of 1919). A preliminary objection has been taken to the hearing of this Rule by Mr. Sanyal who appears for the Grown, and he contends that, having regard to the provisions of the Village' Self-Government Act, this Court cannot interfere under Section 439, Criminal P. C., as it is said that the procedure laid down in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, excepting Ch. 33, shall not apply to any trial, suitor proceedings before a Union Bench or a Union Court: see Section 93, Bengal Act 5 of 1919. It is further argued that Section 71 of the said Act provides that:notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, there shall be no appeal by a convicted person in any case tried by a Union Bench: Provided that the District Magistrate or Subdivisional Magistrate, if satisfied that a failure of ju...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›