Kolkata Court January 1951 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.
Norendra Nath Mozumdar Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-1951
Reported in: AIR1951Cal140
P.B. Mukharji, J.1 The accused Norendra Nath Mozumdar was charged by the Presidency Mag. Calcutta on 25-11-1950 Under Section 19(f) read with Section 19 A, Arms Act for having on 13-6-1950 in his possession or under his control without the necessary licence one Colt Automatic .32 bore pistol & also charged Under Section 19 (f), Arms Act for having on the same day in his possession or under his control without the necessary licence 4 rounds of cartridges of .32 bore. On these charges the accused was committed by the Mag. for trial in the H. C. Criminal Sessions.2. The total evidence on the point of possession or control on which the accused has been committed for trial is this. The accused was arrested on 13-6-1950 & was already in custody at Lalbazar. Pursuant to some statement made by the accused the police expected to recover a pistol from his house. The accused took S. I., D. P. Roy & Samar Ghosh from Lalbazar Police Station to his house at 42 B, Ram Dulal Sarkar Street. The accused...
Bejoy Singh Vs. Bilasroy and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-11-1951
Reported in: AIR1951Cal529
ORDERBachawat, J.1. This is an appln. for setting aside an award of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce.2. By a contract dated 10-5-1946, the petnr. Bejoy Singh Karnwat agreed to sell to the resp. Bilasroy & Co., 45,000 bags B Twills delivery July to September 1946 at Rs. 66-12-0 per 100 bags. The contract is on the standard Indian Jute Mills Asscon. contract form which contains the following arbitration clause :'All matters, questions, disputes, differences &/or claims arising out of &/or concerning &/or in connection with &/or in consequence of or relating to this contract whether or not the obligation of either or both parties under this contract be subsisting at the time of such dispute & whether or not this contract has been terminated or purported to be terminated or completed shall be refd. to the arbitration of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce under the rules of its Tribunal of Arbitration for the time being in force & according to such rules the arbitration shall be conducted.'3. The...
Hazara Singh and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-10-1951
Reported in: AIR1951Cal377
1. These three applts. were tried along with certain other persons by the Assistant Ses. J. of Asansol with the aid of a Jury Madha Singh & Hazara Singh were tried on charges Under Sections. 395 & 397, I. P. C. The Jury returned a unanimous verdict of guilty against Hazara Singh Under Section 395, I. P. C.r but not guilty against the charge Under Section 397, I. P. C. They returned a unanimous verdict of guilty against Madha Singh under both the charges Under Sections 395 & 397, I. P. C. They returned a unanimous verdict of guilty against Harnam Singh Under Section 412, I. P. C. The learned Judge accepted the verdict and acquitted Hazara Singh of the charge Under Section 397, I. P. C., but convicted him Under Section 395, I. P. C., and sentenced him to R. I. for five years. He con-victed Madha Singh Under Sections 395 & 397, I. P. C., & sentenced him to R. I. for seven years Under Section 397 but passed no separate sentence Under Section 395, I. P. C. He convicted Harnam Singh Under Se...
Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal Vs. P.M. Bagchi and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-10-1951
Reported in: [1951]20ITR33(Cal)
HARRIES, C.J. - This is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal, in which the Court is asked to express its opinion upon the following question, :-'Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in holding that in the assessment of the income for the assessment year 1938-39, Section 23 (5) (a) which was introduced in the Indian Income-tax Act in 1939 was applicable ?'The Appellate Tribunal had held that the section was applicable disagreeing with the view of the Income-tax Officer and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.The assessee was a firm, P.M. Bagchi & Co., which had been in existence for some time though its constitution had changed. In the year 1937 a receiver was in possession of the partnership assets on behalf of the then partners. On 16th December, 1937, the receiver sold the right, title and interest of these three partners in the business and the present assessees purc...
Sm. Radharani Dasi Vs. Atul Chandra Mondal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-09-1951
Reported in: AIR1952Cal75,55CWN501
Lahiri, J.1. This Rule was obtained by the objectrix in a proceeding under Section 26F, Bengal Tenancy Act. The admitted facts of the case are as follows: Three brothers named Nathu, Atul & Satish held a two annas share in a certain occupancy folding. Natu along with some o er co-sharer.' of the holding sold the land in dispute in the pr.sent proceeding to the present petitioner, Radharaut Dassi, on 5-7-1944. On 28-3-1949, the present application for pre-emption under Section 26F was filed by Atul & Satish alleging that the two applicant; for pre-emption used to reside in their maternal uncle's house after the death of their father & faking advantage of their absence from their ancestral homestead Natu, in collusion with other co-sharers, sold the disputed land to the present petitioner & that on account of a collusion between the vendors & the purchaser, the applicants Atul & Satish were kept from the knowledge of the sale & that they came to know of the sale for the first time on 2-1...
Kamal Singh and anr. Vs. Sekhar Chand and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-09-1951
Reported in: AIR1952Cal447
ORDERDas Gupta, J.1. This is an application on behalf of two minors named Kamal Singh Rampuria and Surendra Singh Rampuria through their natural guardian and next friend Kesar Bai 'inter alia' for setting aside and cancelling an agreement dated 28th March, 1950 for arbitration and/or declaring it invalid, inoperative & not binding on the petitioners or either of them. The matter arises in this way. The parties to this application are related to each other & their relationship would appear from a geneological table which is set out below: JAWAHARMAL RAMPURIA (d) ____________________________|_______________________________ | | | Babadurmal (d) Hazarimal (d) Hiralal (d) _________|____________ ________|________________ | | | | | | Sidhkaran (d) Jaskaran (d) Sekhar Oland Dhani Nathmal Sundar | Widow- Kesar Bai | | _____________|________ | | Hulaschand | | | | Huleshchand (adopted to Sidhkaran | Sampatmal Moolchand | alias ____________|__________________ ______________|_________________ Bhan...
Commr. of Income Tax Vs. A.W. Figgis and Co. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-09-1951
Reported in: AIR1952Cal677,[1951]20ITR530(Cal)
Banerjee, J.1. This is a Reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-Tax Act and the question on which we are required to express our opinion has been formulated in the following words:'In the facts and circumstances of the case, was the firm as constituted on 31st May 1947, entitled to the relief under section 25(4) of the Indian Income-Tax Act?'2. Section 25(4) is as follows: .'Where the person who was at the commencement of the Indian Income-Tax (Amendment) Act, 1939 (VII of 1939), carrying on any business, profession or vocation on which tax was at any time charged under the provisions of the Indian Income-Tax Act, 1918, is succeeded in such capacity by another person, the change not being merely a change in the constitution of a partnership, no tax shall be payable by the first mentioned person in respect of the income, profits and gains of the period between the end of the previous year and the date of such succession, and such person may further claim that the income, pro...
Surendra Nath Das and ors. Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-05-1951
Reported in: AIR1951Cal396,55CWN255
Harries, C.J.1. This is a petn. made under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for a writ in the nature of mandamus to be issued to compel the opposite party to refrain from or give effect to a certain notfn. made under the West Bengal Land Development & Planning Act, 1948 & the rules made thereunder.2. A preliminary point has been raised in this case, namely, that before a writ of mandamus could be issued a demand for performance must be made preceding the appln. & further performance must have been refused. The demand for performance & refusal must fee established before any writ of mandamus or any writ in the nature of mandamus or any order under old Section 45, Specific Relief Act, could be made. This provision is incorporated in Section 46, Specific Relief Act. But it is equally applicable to a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus.3. The matter is dealt with in Halsbury's Laws of England, 2nd Edn., Vol. 9 at p. 771 in these words :'As a general rule the writ wi...
BepIn Behari Maity Vs. Paban Sardar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-05-1951
Reported in: AIR1951Cal418
Das Gupta, J.1. This Rule was obtained against an order of the learned Mag. of Alipore acquitting tinder Section 258, Cr. P. C., the opposite parties against whom a charge had been framed under Section 379, Penal Code, after which the learned Mag. passed the following order :'To 6-3-50 for cross-examination of P. Ws. & further P. Ws. P. Ws. to give P. R. of Rs. 10 each. Accused as before.'On 6-3-1950 neither the complainant nor the witnesses were present. No petition was filed on behalf of the complainant to explain this absence. The learned Mag. pointed out in his order of 6-6-1950, that the record of the case would show that the complainant did not take steps for summoning his witnesses for that dav. He held also that the evidence of the witnesses on the record could not be admissible under Section 33, Evidence Act, as there was nothing on the record to show that the witnesses were absent on one or other of the grounds mentioned in that section. He pointed out that the witnesses had ...
Secretary Ratepayers' Committee, North Barrackpore Municipality Vs. Dw ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-05-1951
Reported in: AIR1952Cal127
ORDERGuha, J.1. This reference under Section 438. Cr. P. C. arises out of certain proceedings under Section 133 Cr. P. C. On the 18th June 1948, proceedings under Section 133 were drawn up against Dwip Narayan Singh alleging that he was causing a public nuisance by (1) obstruction and encroachment on the public pathway leading to the ghats by excavating earth beyond limit, (2) by accumulation of filthy water in the excavated ditches during the rains and (3) by creating smoke nuisance and final orders were passed under Section 137. The learned Magistrate did not find nuisance numbers (2) and (3) mentioned in the conditional order. He was satisfied however that there were some obstructions in the Bagdipara Ghat Road, one of the three public roads alleged to have been affected by the brick-field of Dwip Narayan Singh and the latter was ordered to remove all the obstructions from the Bagdipara Ghat Road including the brick-Kiln by the side of it.2. In the opinion of the learned Additional ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »