Kolkata Court November 1949 Judgments
Harendra Nath Vs. Sm. Dakhyamoni Dassi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-30-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Cal191
ORDERR.P. Mookerjee, J.1. This application in revision is on behalf of the creditor. On an application by the creditor, an award was made by Fatepur Debt Settlement Board on 25th January 1942. In 1944, an application was filed by the debtor before the Collector of 24 Parganas for permission under Rule 91 (b) read with Section 44, Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act for review of the award which had been made in January 1942 inasmuch as more than 60 days had expired from the making of the award. On 21st July 1944, the order passed by the Collector permitting review of the previous award was received by the Debt Settlement Board. From the order sheet maintained by the Board, it appears that after the receipt of that intimation various orders were passed from time to time, sometimes directing service of notice on the creditor and sometimes on the debtor concerned. On 12th April 1946 up to which the proceedings were continuing before the Board, the latter directed the debtor to file a formal a...
Tag this Judgment!Corporation of Calcutta Vs. Krishna Chandra Sil and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-30-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Cal314,54CWN220
Sen, J.1. This Rule has been obtained by the Corporation of Calcutta against an order passed by Sri P. Basu, Municipal Magistrate, Calcutta, awarding costs against the Corporation and directing the Corporation to pay compensation to the complainant, The proceedings were under, Section 535, Calcutta Municipal Act of 1923. One, Krishna Chandra Sil filed a petition before the Magistrate complaining that a nuisance was being caused by a Dal mill. This matter was gone into by the learned Magistrate and he directed the Corporation to close down the mill within one mouth from the date of his order and in the same order he passed the order for costs and compensation. This was done behind the back of the Corporation as no notice was served upon the Corporation before the order was passed. It is true that Section 535, Calcutta Municipal Act does not provide for any notice being served but in my opinion it would be entirely unfair and unjust and against all principles of law to pass an order pena...
Tag this Judgment!Basantlal Jagatramka Vs. Dominion of India
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-29-1949
Reported in: AIR1952Cal340
Harries, C.J.1. This is an appeal from an order of Sinha J. dated 4-5-1949 allowing en application for stay of a suit pending arbitration proceedings.2. On 9-9-1944 the appellant entered into a contract with the Dominion of India for the supply of bales of hay. The contract contained an arbitration clause which was clause 21 of the contract. That clause reads as follows:'Any dispute or difference arising out of this contract, settlement of which is not hereinbefore provided for, shall be referred to the arbitration of the officer sanctioning the contract whose decision shall be final & binding'.3. In a note appended to the contract there is a provision that in the case of contracts made by the Military Farms Department the District Commander concerned shall be the arbitrator under clause 21. It is conceded that the contract in question was a contract made with the Military Farms Department & therefore the Dist. Commander was the arbitrator named in the contract.4. On the last day of li...
Tag this Judgment!Budhu Mohan and anr. Vs. Corporation of Calcutta and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-28-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Cal188
ORDERSen, J.1. This Rule has been obtained by the petitioners who have been convicted by the Municipal Magistrate and fined. The case against them is that they did not comply with a notice to vacate certain premises which were in a dangerous condition and that thereby they had committed an offence which was punishable under Section 488, Calcutta Municipal Act.2. The facts briefly are these : The petitioners are tenants of certain premises. It came to the notice of the Municipality that the premises were in a dangerous condition and after inspection a notice was served both upon the landlord and the tenants under Rule 4, Sub-rule (2) of Schedule XVIII, Calcutta Municipal Act requiring the inmates of the building to vacate it. The tenants admitted that they received this notice. They applied under Section 511, Calcutta Municipal Act for a withdrawal of the notice. The matter was considered by the Administrative Officer and he was satisfied that the notice was necessary. In spite of this ...
Tag this Judgment!Balabux Darolia Vs. the King
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-25-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Cal353,54CWN286
ORDERSen, J.1. This rule has been obtained by the accused who has been convicted of having committed an offence punishable under Section 14, Bengal Motor Spirit Sales Taxation Act of 1941, and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 300 in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 2 months. This sentence was upheld on appeal and the accused has obtained this rule. 2. Several points were taken in the petition, applying for this rule. Only one point has been pressed, viz. that the accused has been prejudiced by reason of the refusal of the Magistrate to allow the accused to have copies of the statements made to the police by witnesses under Section 161, Criminal P. C. I have seen the learned Magistrate's reply to this ground. He says that the matter was not pursued on the date fixed. It seems however from the record that there were two applications; the first application apparently was a verbal one and it was rejected. Thereafter, there was a written application referring to the prior applicatio...
Tag this Judgment!Gouri Sankar Singha Roy and ors. Vs. Prafulla Behari Singha Roy and or ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-23-1949
Reported in: AIR1951Cal210,54CWN651
Gopendra Nath Das, J.1. This appeal is on behalf of defendants 3 to 10. The plaintiff's case is that defendants 1 and 3 were adjudicated insolvents in Insolvency Case No. 66 of 1936 on. 16 2-1939, that defendants 1 to 10 were members of a joint Mitakshara Hindu family, defendants 3 to 6 being the sons of defendant 1 and defendants 7 to 10 being the sons of defendant 2, that the disputed property was the ancestral homestead of the defendants, that the Province of Bengal which was entitled to certain dues on account of settlement operations from the defendants was creditor 6 in the application for insolvency, that on their application the disputed property was brought to sale and purchased by the plaintiff on 22-8-1941 and the learned District Judge as a Receiver in Insolvency executed a conveyance in favour of the plaintiff on 24-1-1942. The plaintiff having failed to get possession instituted the present suit for declaration of his title and for recovery of possession.2. To this suit s...
Tag this Judgment!Sailendra Nath Sen, Auction-purchaser Vs. Sudhanya Charan Das Naiya an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-23-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Cal166
ORDERR.P. Mookerjee, J.1. This is an application in revision on behalf of the auction, purchaser against an order passed by the lower appellate Court setting aside a sale. The sale in question was held on 5th May 1941, and a jama of Rs. 74-8-16 gandas covering an area of about 79 bighas was sold for Rs. 203-9-0. About a quarter of this area was khas land and the remaining portion was tenanted. The sale was confirmed on 7th June 1941 and the auction purchaser thereafter obtained possession through Court. About four years later, on 24th July 1945, an application purporting to be under Sections 173 and 174 (3), Bengal Tenancy Act was filed by the judgment-debtors. It was alleged that the auction-purchaser was the benamdar of some of the judgment-debtors and this was made the foundation of the application under Section 173. Various allegations about suppression of service of notices and other irregularities and of fraud were made in support of the prayer made under Section 174 (3), Bengal ...
Tag this Judgment!Tetri Vs. Ram Newaj
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-23-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Cal168
ORDERSen, J.1. The petitioner has obtained this Rule and it relates to certain proceedings under Section 488, Criminal P. C.2. The material facts which need be stated briefly are as follows: The petitioner applied for an order of maintenance under Section 488, Criminal P. C. against her husband. The order granting maintenance was made on 23rd June 1947. There were certain proceedings thereafter which need not be considered. On 3rd November 1947, the husband made an application under Section 488, Sub-section (5), Criminal P. C., for cancellation of the order for maintenance on the ground that his wife was living in adultery. When that application came to be heard a compromise petition was put in on 2nd December 1948 which is in the following terms:'The humble petition of the parties in this case, most respectfully sheweth: That the above matter has been compromised between the parties and the husband and wife have agreed to live together and none of the parties desires to proceed with a...
Tag this Judgment!Bhupati Ghosh Vs. the King
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-23-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Cal327,54CWN221
Chunder, J.1. This is an appeal against the conviction and sentence of the appellant under Section 395, Penal Code. Briefly, the facts are that there was a dacoity in the house of the complainant Jiten. There were three other inmates in the house, of them P. W. 2 is said to have fainted and P. W. NOS. 3 and 4 were two ladies. P.W. Nos. 6, 7 and 8 are three neighbours who came the next morning some hours later.2. As the learned Magistrate's order sheet seems to show, he considered that the public prosecutor had good reason to think that P. Ws. Nos. 6, 7 and 8 will not be witnesses of truth, but as the defence wanted them to be tendered for cross-examination, he directed that they should be so tendered, purporting to follow a decision of this Court, and at the same time when calling upon the public prosecutor to do so he gave him an opportunity to cross-examine these witnesses later.3. Mr. Mukherjee, appearing for the defence, has rightly pointed out that the learned Magistrate could hav...
Tag this Judgment!M.A. Davar Vs. Ahmad Ali Khan and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-22-1949
Reported in: AIR1952Cal219
ORDERR.P. Mookerjee, J.1. The opposite party No. 4 was reported to be dead by the serving peon in his report dated 22-5-1949. No application for substitution having been filed for a period over 90 days from the date of the peon's report the Registrar recorded an order on 26-8-1949, that there had been abatement so far as opposite party N. 4 was concerned. On 10-11-1949, an application was filed on behalf of the petitioner with notice to the surviving opposite parties that on the death of opposite party No. 4, opposite parties 1 to 3 were the heirs of the said deceased opposite party No. 4 & that a note might be made to that effect. An objection was raised on behalf of the opposite party Nos. 1 to 3 to the effect that opposite parties Nos. 1 to 3 had been on the record previously in their personal capacity; on the death of opposite party No. 4, their mother, they were representing her interest in a different capacity. It was contended that an application for substitution in such a case ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »