Kolkata Court April 1946 Judgments
Manindra Nath Mallik Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-29-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal158
1. In this case the accused has been convicted on a unanimous verdict of the jury of offences under Section 380/157, Penal Code, the cage being in brief : he stole some betelnuts from a room at night the entry having been obtained in circumstances that constituted housebreaking by night. The learned Additional Sessions Judge having obtained the jury's verdict on this point fell into grave error when he proceeded to consider a further charge against the accused under Section 23(b), Criminal Tribes Act. It appears that the accused was made a member of a Criminal Tribe on 9th March 1933. A few weeks later he was convicted on 29th April 1983 of dacoity and a few months later on 26th August 1933 again of dacoity and on the same date he was convicted by the same Court under Section 402, Penal Code, and sentenced to one year's imprisonment. The learned Judge's error was that he failed entirely to follow the provisions of the Code in the matter of the determination whether these previous convi...
Tag this Judgment!Muralidhar Jalan Vs. Paresh Chandra Chatterjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-18-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal14
1. This appeal is on behalf of the plaintiffs in a suit for damages for alleged breach of contract. The plaintiffs state that there was a contract between them and the defendant by which the latter agreed to supply both Finland and Japanese tea chests of different sizes at different rates. The total quantity of Finland chests which the defendants under, took to supply was 4975 and the total quantity of Japanese chests was 8125. The defendant failed to supply 1700 Finland chests and 1450 Japanese chests of different sizes towards the end of November, to be more precise, refused to supply them on 28-114939. Their further case is that at the date of the anticipatory breach on the part of the defendant the market for tea chests was very high and they claimed the difference between the alleged contract prices and the prices then prevailing as damage.2. They say in their plaint that the contract was concluded through correspondence and the letter written by them to the defendants on 16-2-193...
Tag this Judgment!Narendra Nath Mitter Vs. Rampal Singh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-18-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal378
Sharpe, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the respondent against the appellant, who is a ward of Court, for specific performance of a contract for lease of a certain hat. The appellant has been represented throughout the proceedings by the Manager of the Court of Wards in accordance with the provisions of Section 51, Court of Wards Act (9 [IX] of 1879). The main facts are not disputed and are briefly as follows:2. On 8 5-1983, the plaintiff-respondent, Rampal Singh was granted an Ijara lease for the Bowbazar hat by the defendant-appellant, Kumar Narendra K. Mitter for a period of 10 years ending in April 1942 at a rent of Rs. 40 per anensem from May 1933 to April 1937 and at Rs. 60 per mensem from May 1937 to April 1942, There was a clause in the lease relating to its renewal, and there is some controversy as to whether it granted to the lessee a right of renewal subject to his acceptance of the appropriate rent fixed by the lessor, or whether the renewal was subject als...
Tag this Judgment!Jagatbandhu Biswas and ors. Vs. Iswar Chandra Nandy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-18-1946
Reported in: AIR1948Cal61
B.K. Mukherjea, J.1. This appeal is on behalf of the plaintiffs and it arises out of a suit commenced by them for establishment of their title to one-third share of the property in suit and for recovery of joint possession along with the defendants. The material facts lie within a very short compass and are not in controversy. The subject-matter of dispute is a tank which appertains to noabad taluk Bhabani Charan which originally belonged to one Gour Hari Nandi in taluki right. On Gour Hari's death, it devolved on his three sons, namely, Iswar Chandra (defendant l), Chandra Kumar (defendants) and Sasi Kumar. Sasi Kumar made a gift of his one third share in the property to his wife Mallikabala who is defendant 2 in the suit. It is not disputed that the tank was and is enjoyed as a part of the dwelling house owned by this family of three brothers. On 15-9-1929, the interest of Chandra Kumar in the tank was put up to sale in execution of a money decree against him obtained by a third part...
Tag this Judgment!Madaripur Commercial Bank Ltd. Vs. Lal Mohan Saha and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-17-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal127
Chakravartti, J.1. This rule raises a question of general importance as to the true scope of Section 37A, Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act Of several points urged before the authorities below that single one was urged before this Court. The question arises out of the following facts. On 21-2-1924, the father of the opposite parties took a loan of Rs 12,000 from the petitioner bank on a mortgage of 15 items of property. On 9-6-1934 the bank obtained a final mortgage decree for a little over Rs. 20,000 and at a sale held on 21-2-1936, against the opposite parties who had been substituted for their father on his death it purchased 13 of the properties for a sum of Rs. 17,550 which naturally was set off against the decretal dues. The remaining two properties were purchased by one Lokenath Poddar for Rs. 4175. The sale proceeds were more than sufficient to satisfy the decree and the balance left was attached and taken away by some other creditors of the opposite parties. The petitioner bank ...
Tag this Judgment!SalimaddIn and ors. Vs. DaliluddIn and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal131
ORDERB.K. Mukherjea, J.1. The predecessors of opposite parties 1 to 9 in this rule obtained a decree against the petitioners in the Union Court of Talma in the district of Faridpur for a sum of Rs. 42 only. The Union Court being unable to effect satisfaction of the decree granted a certificate to the decree-holder under Section 91(1), Village Self-Government Act, and the decree-holders thereupon presented an application for execution of the decree in the Court of the Sadar Munsiff of Faridpur on 2-5-1942. On 18-11-1942, certain properties belonging to the judgment-debtors were put up to sale and purchased by the decree-holders themselves. This sale was confirmed on 6-1-1943. On 24-1-1943, the judgment-debtors started a proceeding for setting aside the sale under Order XXI, Rule 90, Civil P.C. and it was registered as Misc. case 130 of 1943. Though the application was headed under Order XXI, Rule 90, Civil P.C. one of the grounds put forward by the judgment-debtors in impeaching the val...
Tag this Judgment!Jnanendra Narayan Vs. Naba Kumar Singha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal141
1. The appellants who are the plaintiffs in, a suit instituted under Section 36, Bengal Money Lenders Act, 1940, (hereafter called the Act) borrowed from the respondents' predecessors a total sum of Rs. 25,700 on different dates from 5-4-1923, to 16-10-1930. All these loans were taken on hatchittas and carried compound interest at 12 per cent, per annum with yearly rests. They paid in all Rs. 8278 before April 1933. On 3-4-1933, accounts were adjusted on the basis of the hatchittas and after giving credit for those payments a sum of Rs. 45,901 was found due from them. For securing the said sum, the appellants executed on the next day a mortgage (Ex. A) in favour of the respondents. The said sum of Rs. 45,901 was taken as principal and it was to carry compound interest at the rate of 10 1/2 per cent, per annum with yearly rests. There, after the appellants paid Rs. 3200 towards the mortgage dues on different dates, the last payment being in March 1937. On 13-4-1937, there was another ad...
Tag this Judgment!Paresh Nath Koyal and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal32
Ellis, J.1. Paresh Nath Koyal, petitioner in Rule No. 1281, Rash Behari Banerjee petitionee in Rule No. 1317, and Panchanan Banerjee, petitioner in Rule No. 1318, were placed on trial along with another person, Krishnadhan Chaterjee before Mr. Lala Jogesh Chandra, Assistant Sessions Judge, 24-Parganas and a jury of 5 persons. It was charged against them that between 20-12-1948 and 17-1-1944, at Naihati, at Alipore and at other places, they were parties to a criminal conspiracy to cheat the complainant Ram Gopal Agarwala, and that in pursuance of that conspiracy they forged documents for the purpose of cheating Ram Gopal Agarwala, and made use of the same in prosecution of their common object of cheating him. The 3 petitioners were found guilty, and were duly convicted in accordance with the verdict of the jury. They preferred an appeal to the Sessions Judge, and the appeals were dismissed. Krishnadhan Chatterjee was found not guilty by the jury and was acquitted.2. The case for the pro...
Tag this Judgment!Ballygunge Bank Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal159
Gentle, J.1. This reference under Section 66(1), Income-tax Act, is made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the assessees, the Ballygunge Bank Ltd. The question referred for the opinion of the Court is:Whether in the circumstances of the case the rent derived from the buildings erected by the assessee was properly assessed under Section 9, Income-tax Act.?2. The assessees are a public limited company, one of its objects being to acquire land by purchase, lease or otherwise, to deal in such land or to build houses thereon and to deal in or let out such houses.3. By deed of lease dated 28-2-1936 the lessors let to the assessees, as lessees, a vacant piece of land (including a tank) of an area exceeding 6 bighas for the term of 40 years at a progressive monthly ground rent therein specified. The lease provided, inter alia, that:Clause (5) The assessees would be entitled to parcel the land into a number of plots and to erect buildings, etc., thereon and to let out the ...
Tag this Judgment!H.H.B. Gill and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Cal162
Blank, J.1. Appeals Nos. 624 and 625 of 1945 are appeals respectively by H.H.B. Gill and Anil Lahiri against their convictions and sentences, both appellants under Section 165 read with Section 120B, Penal Code, and respectively under Sections 165 and 165 read with Section 109, Penal Code. They were sentenced to simple imprisonment for 3 months the former in Division I, and the latter in Division II, and also to pay a fine of Rs. 210 each with simple imprisonment for 14 days in default. These sentences were under Sections 165 and 165 read with Section 109, Penal Code. No separate sentences were passed under Section 165 read with Section 120B, Penal Code. Revision No. 1330 of 1945 arises from an application for enhancement of sentence. The appellant Gill was and is a Captain in the army. At the material time he held an appointment carrying with it the temporary rank of Major but having vacated that appointment he has now reverted to the substantive rank of Captain. His learned Counsel w...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »