Kolkata Court July 1949 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.
Bissen Singh Vs. Prameswari Singh and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-07-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Cal99
Harries, C.J.1. This is a petition for revision of an order of a learned Magistrate acquitting the opposite parties under Section 258, Criminal P. C.2. The learned Magistrate held that the whole of the trial was illegal and he did not enter into the merits of the dispute.3. It appears that a complaint was made to a learned Magistrate alleging offences under Sections 448 and 341, Penal Code. On 6th December 1947, the learned Magistrate passed the following order:'O/C Watgunge, P.S--to make an enquiry and take cognizance if any cognizable offence is made out and send a report by 6th January 1948.'4. The police apparently reported, as an order of 6th January 1948, reads: 'Seen report. Complainant absent--file.' There is another order of the same date: ' Complainant appears by petition. Seen police report. Summon Balai Lal Das and Parmeswar Singh under Section 488 and 341, Penal Code for 4th February 1948.'5. The proceedings continued after the evidence of the prosecution had been taken an...
Pasupati Banerji Vs. the King
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-07-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Cal97
Sen, J.1. This Rule has been obtained by one Pashupati Banerjee praying that certain proceedings against him should be quashed.2. The facts giving rise to this Rule may be briefly stated as follows : On 19th July 1948, the petitioner Pashupati Banerjee wrote a letter to the Chairman of the Kamarhati Municipality objecting to the inclusion of the name, Sri Sushil Kumar Mukherjee in the preliminary Electoral Roll. In his letter, the petitioner asserted that he had come to know after an informal enquiry that Sushil Kumar Mukherjee did not pay in-come-tax, that therefore he could not claim to be a voter and that his name should be struck off if it was found after necessary enquiry that he did not pay the income-tax. Copies of the letter to the Chairman were sent to various persons amongst whom was the Sub-Divisional Officer of Barrackpore. With the copy was sent the following observation:'With a request to look into the matter seriously and call for from the Income-tax Officer necessary in...
Gorachand Das Vs. Nitai Das and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-06-1949
Reported in: AIR1951Cal308
ORDERSen, J.1. This is a Reference by the Sessions Judge of Midnapore against an order of acquittal passed at a summary trial by Sri T. S. Dutta, Magistrate, First Glass, Midnapore.2. In all my experience as a Judge and as a lawyer I have never come across a reference of this description. The learned Judge seems to have no idea of the provisions relating to summary trials, nor does he seem to have any idea of the fact that acquittals are not to be lightly interfered with. The accused were tried for having committed offences punishable under the Cattle-trespass Act and for causing hurt. The offences were obviously trivial and I find it difficult to understand why in a trivial case like this the time of this Court should be wasted by a reference made for setting aside an order of acquittal. The main complaint of the learned Judge is that the Magistrate has not written a judgment when acquitting the accused. If he had taken the trouble to understand the provisions of Section 263, Criminal...
Bhupendra De and ors. Vs. the Chief Secretary Government of West Benga ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-05-1949
Reported in: 1950CriLJ169
Harries, C. J.1. These are seven petitions made Under Section 491, Criminal P. 0,, in which prayers are made for the release of certain persona detained in various jails in this province on the ground that their detention is illegal.2. Miscellaneous case No. 102 of 1949 concerned one Bhupen De who ia confined in the Darjeeling Jail. According to his petition he was arrested Under Section 30, West Bengal Security Act on nth May 1949, and an order Under Section 16 of that Act was subsequently made on 3rd Juna 1949, This order was an order for detention for a period of nine months. The petitioner claims that the Act under which he was detained is no longer in force by reasons of The fact that it was not extended in accordance with law. He therefore claims that his detention is unlawful and that he should be released,3. Miscellaneous case No. 103 of 1949 is by a detained person Pangmali Doherty who is confined in the jail at Darjeeling. In this petition ha states that he was arrested on 21...
Benode Behary Roy Vs. the General Assurance Society Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-05-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Cal232
P.B. Mukharji, J.1. The plaintiff sues the defendant company for the recovery of the sum of Rs. 6,184 as being the gratuity alleged to be earned by the plaintiff as an employee of the defendant company. The defendant company resists the plaintiff's claim on the ground that the bye-laws which entitled the plaintiff at one stage of his service to claim the gratuity had been altered before the termination of the plaintiff's services. The vexed question as to how far a company by altering its bye-laws can prejudicially affect an employee's contract of service has been raised in this suit.2. The facts may be stated very briefly. The plaintiff was appointed Secretary of the Company in October 1924 at a salary of Rs. 160 per month and it is the pleading of the plaintiff that such appointment was subject to and in terms of the regulations contained in the then bye-laws of the defendant company. He thereafter rose to the position of the Officiating General Manager of the Company in 1982-88. His...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›