Kolkata Court January 1949 Judgments
Ramesh Chandra Basu Majumdar Vs. Brojendra Nath Paul
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Cal259,54CWN135
G.N. Das, J.1. This appeal is on behalf of the defendant in a suit for recovery of damages for malicious prosecution. The plaintiff's allegation is that he acted as the defendant's pleader in Money Execution Case No. 101 of 1942 and withdrew certain gums of money from Court and paid to the defendant his share of the moneys so withdrawn, oa a receipt given by the defendant. The defendant however lodged a complaint before the Magistrate at Serampore alleging that the plaintiff and two other persons had forged a vakalatnama, and on the strength of the forged vakalatnama had withdrawn moneys from Court and had misappropriated the same. The Magistrate thereupon took cognizance of the matter and sent the matter for enquiry to the munsif at Serampore. The munsif issued a notice on the plaintiff, and after an enquiry made by him, submitted a report. On perusal of the report, the Magistrate dismissed the complaint under Section 203, Criminal P. C. The plaintiff claimed damages for a sum of Rs. ...
Tag this Judgment!Biswanath Bubna and anr. Vs. the King
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-26-1949
Reported in: 1949CriLJ972
Sen, J.1. This appeal is by two persons Biswanath Bubna and Eanadhir Sahitya Lankar. I shall refer to them hereafter as Bubna and Lankar respectively. They were tried together by Sri N. Ehastgir, Additional Presidency Magistrate. Bubna was charged with having committed an offence punishable under Section 600, Penal Code, that is to say, with the offence of defamation. He has also been charged with having committed an offence punishable under 9. 601, Penal Code, that is to say, the offence of printing a defamatory matter. Lankar has been charged with defamation only. be to the appellants have been convicted of the charges framed against them. Bubna has been sentenced to pay a fine of as. 400, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for four months with reference to the charge under 8. 500, Penal Code. No separate sentence was passed against him with respect to the offence punishable under Section 501, Penal Code. Lankar has been sentenced to pay a fine of Us. 100, in default to suffer ...
Tag this Judgment!Rabindra Nath Deb Vs. Sushil Chandra Deb
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-25-1949
Reported in: AIR1952Cal427
Das Gupta, J.1. In this suit the plaintiff claims a declaration that he is solely entitled to the premises No. 8/2, Kartick Bose Lane and the outer portion of the premises No. 9 Kartick Bose Lane now known as 9/A and 9/B Kartick Bose Lane, Calcutta for possession and for other reliefs. The facts of the case which are not disputed are as follows.2. One Sm. Kamalmohi Dassi died on 4-6-1908. She was the owner amongst others of the premises in suit. Before her death she left a will probate of which was duly obtained from this Hon'ble Court. Sm. Kamalmoni Dassi left her surviving her husband's brother one Woomesh Chandra Deb and his wife Sm. Kumodini Dassi and their son Sarat Chandra Deb. Sarat Chandra Deb's first wife had died and thereafter he married again. By his first wife Sarat Chandra Deb had a son named Rabindra Nath Deb who is the plaintiff in this suit. The plaintiff was born on 19-10-1906 I e. during the life time of the said Sm. Kamalmoni Dassi. Sarat Chandra Deb had another son...
Tag this Judgment!Provash Kumar Bose and anr. Vs. the King
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-25-1949
Reported in: AIR1951Cal475
Das Gupta, J.1. These two appeals are by two persons, Provash Kumar Bose & Azizur Rahman who were tried together by a Presidency Mag. of Calcutta. Provash Kumar Bose was convicted under Section 384, I. P. Code & Azizur Rahman under Sections 384 -199, I. P. C. Both were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months & to pay a fine of Rs. 201 in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for another three months.2. The prosecution case was that in the early hours of the morning of 21-12-1947 these two accused came to the bakery belonging to Daud Rahman at No. 9, Nawab Abdul Latif Street & when the door was opened, entered the bakery saying that they were men from the Civil Supplies Dept. Azizur Rahman, it is said, weighed one loaf of bread & said that it was under-weight & when, on his demand, Daud Rahman was called, the applt. Azizur Rahman told Daud Rahman that he would have to go to the thana as the loaves of bread in his bakery were under-weight & it is said that the applt....
Tag this Judgment!Naresh Chandra Bose Vs. Sachindra Nath Deb and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-24-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Cal8
R.P. Mookerjee, J.1. This is an appeal on behalf of the judgment-debtor against a decision by the Subordinate Judge, First Court, Alipore disallowing certain objections raised under Section 47, Civil P. C., read with Section 168A, Bengal Tenancy Act.2. The judgment-debtor, Nareah Chandra Bose, held a patni under the predecessor-in- interest of the decree-holders opposite parties. For the realisation of arrear patni rent, the landlords obtained three decrees in succession in rent suit No. 2 of 1936 on 2lst December 1936, rent suit No. 12 of 1937 on 9th April 1938 and rent suit No. 16 of 1939 on 17th February 1940. In execution of the last of the three decrees, the defaulting patni was sold on 15th January 1942 and purchased by two of the three decree-holders. The decree-holders auction purchasers sold the patni on 4th April 1944 to one Provash Mallik, All the rent suits bad been brought in the Court of Subordinate Judge, Jessore and the decree-holders applied for the transfer of the dec...
Tag this Judgment!Bechu Vs. the King
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-24-1949
Reported in: 1950CriLJ153
Das Gupta, J.1. This appeal is against conviction by the Sessions Judge of Midnapora Under Section 376, Penal Code in accordance with the unanimous verdict of the jury and a semiotic of rigorous imprisonment for five years,2. The prosecution case was that on 18th January 1948 when Saraswati, the daughter of Anil Chandra Guinn, a tea-shop keeper, had gone out of her house to answer a call of nature and was sitting near a bamboo clump, this accused caught hold of her and taking her up in his arms carried her to a tamarind tree not far off and, after threatening her to keep quiet laid her down and had forcible sexual intercourse with her. Ii is said that thereafter the accused brought her back near her house and left her there, after which bob entered her house and on being asked by her mother where she bad been she told her everything. Shortly after that she was taken to the hospital where she was examined by two doctors. Late in the same night she along with her parents went to the than...
Tag this Judgment!Nossibolla Vs. D. Stephens
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-1949
Reported in: AIR1952Cal339
ORDERSen, J.1. This Rule has been obtained by one Nossibolla against an order acquitting the opposite party D. Stephens.2. The case of the petitioner briefly is as follows : He is a seaman. He wished to get engaged on board a ship & for this purpose he had to approach a body known as the Calcutta Maritime Board to give him what is known as a Muster Card. He applied to the opposite party D. Stephens for this purpose & Stephens gave him a Muster Card but demanded payment of one rupee for this. The contention of the petitioner is that Stephens has contravened the provisions of Sections 25 & 26, Merchant Shipping Act. This case was tried together with another case of a similar nature namely the case of 'Nasurulla v. Stephens'. The evidence was recorded by the learned Chief Presidency Magistrate. He was transferred & his successor has passed the present judgment acquitting Stephens.3. The decision of this case will depend mainly upon the construction of Sections 24, 25 & 26, Merchant Shippi...
Tag this Judgment!J.M. Cohen Vs. the King
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-1949
Reported in: 1950CriLJ129
Harries, C.J.1. This is an appeal by one J. N. Cohen, who was convicted by an Additional Preaidenoy Magistrate of an offence Under Section 120B, Penal Code, read with Section 7 (1) of Ordinance III [3] of 1046. He was sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of KB. 1000; in default of payment of the fine he was ordered to undergo a further period of six months' rigorous imprisonment.2. Cohen was a Direotor of a Bank known as the Lall Bank and it is said that he was in charge 'of the finance side of the Bank. The Managing Director of the Bank wag a Mr. K. Lall, who was also the proprietor of a firm known as K. Lall and Co., managing agents of the Calcutta Marine Engineering Company. Cohen and Lall ware charged along with Chitta-ranjan Bose, an Accountant of the1 Calcutta Marine and Engineering Companyi and S. K. Datta, Secretary of K. Lall and Co., and were tried together. Chittaranjan Bose and S. K. Datta were acquitted, but Lall was convicted upon the charge of...
Tag this Judgment!Phani Bhusan Ghosh and anr. Vs. Sibakali Basu
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-20-1949
Reported in: AIR1952Cal218
ORDERSen, J.1. This rule has been obtained by Phani Bhusan Ghosh and Sital Sarkar. Phani Bhusan has been convicted of having: committed an offence punishable under section 355 of the Indian Penal Code, that is to say, of having assaulted a person with intent to dishonour him. Sital Sarkar, petitioner No. 2, was convicted under section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, that is to say, of having caused simple hurt; both the petitioners have been sentenced to pay certain fines in default to undergo imprisonment for certain terms.2. The case for the prosecution briefly is as follows: one Sibakali Bose lives in the village of Harope. He is the complainant. His son-in-law Nanda Dulal Das lives in the village of Khalore. On the 26th December 1947, Siba Kali went to his son-in-law and stayed there. On the 28th of the same month at about 7-30 a.m. the petitioners Phani Bhusan and Sital Sarkar and one Chandi Sarkar had an altercation with Nanda Dulal over the repairing of an old fencing which was on...
Tag this Judgment!Nagendranath Karmakar and anr. Vs. Jotish Chandra Mukherjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-19-1949
Reported in: AIR1952Cal221
Gopendra Nath Das, J.1. This appeal is on behalf of the defendants in a suit for ejectment and for recovery of mesne profits and compensation for damages done to the demised ffremises.2. The inception of the lease dates back to the year 1942 when the defendant No. 1 wrote a letter to the plaintiff agreeing to hold the demised premises at a monthly rent of Rs. 26/-. The letter recited that the tenancy would be determined by one month's notice. Subsequently thereto, the defendants took a lease of an additional room and agreed to pay additional rent. The terms of the lease continued as before. The plaintiff served a notice to quit on defendants Nos. 1 and 2 requiring them to vacate the premises by the end of September, 1946. The notice recites that the defendant No.1 is the tenant of the premises, that the defendant No. 2 had paid certain sums towards the rent of the premises and that as a matter of abundant caution, the notice to quit was also being served on the defendant No. 2. As the ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »