Kolkata Court December 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.
In Re: N.K. Sen, Advocate
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-13-1951
Reported in: AIR1952Cal551
Chakravartti, J.1. This is a proceeding under Section 10 of the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 against a certain Advocate.2. The Advocate concerned is one Mr. N. K. Sen, who was enrolled on January 2, 1948 and ordinarily practises in the Court of Small Causes On September 30, 1950, he was convicted by the Presidency Magistrate, Tenth Court, Calcutta under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code for criminal breach of trust as an agent in respect of a sum of Rs. 7,171-3-6 pies, which he had collected on behalf of some clients. The sentence passed upon him was rigorous imprisonment for one year.3. On appeal, this Court, by a judgment, dated May 25, 1951, upheld the conviction but reduced the sentence to a fine of Rs. 50/-. It appears that on the date of the judgment of this Court the Advocate paid up the whole amount to the clients concerned.4. After the conviction had taken place, the trying Magistrate forwarded to this Court, as required by a circular letter, two copies of his judgment for...
Naba Kumar Saha Vs. S. Banerjee and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-11-1951
Reported in: AIR1953Cal96,56CWN589
Das, J. 1. This rule was issued on 9-11-1951 by P. N. Mookerjee J.'calling upon Mr. S. Eanerji, Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, and the Collector of Howrah to show cause why they should not be committed for contempt of this Court for alleged non-compliance with the order dated 27-8-1951 and made in C. R. 436 of 1951, or such other or further order made as to this Court may seem fit and proper'. 2. The rule was made returnable on November 14, 1951, and it was directed that the matter might be put up before the learned Judge (P. N. Mukherji J.). On November 14, 1951 the learned Judge adjourned the hearing of the rule for one week on the prayer of the opposite parties which was not objected to by the learned Advocate for the petitioner. 3. By an order dated 21-11-1951 passed by the learned Chief Justice, the case was directed to be placed before the Bench presided over by me. 4. The case was thereupon heard by myself and Das Gupta J. 5. I shall first state the facts which led ...
Chinese Tannery Owners' Association and Ors. Vs. Makhan Lal and Ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-11-1951
Reported in: AIR1952Cal560
Das Gupta, J.1. The appellants before us are three of 252 defendants in a suit brought by one Makhan Lai Ganguly, a building contractor. The suit was brought on a claim of a little less than two lacs of rupees said to be due on account of the costs of construction of a. building and costs of materials supplied, after giving full credit for three lacs seventy four thousand and sixty three rupees said to have been received from the Chinese Tannery Owners' Association, appellant No. 1 before us and defendant No. 2 in the suit. Defendant No. 3 is the President of the Chinese Tannery Owners' Association while defendant No. 4 is the Chairman of the building Committee. The plaintiff prayed for a temporary injunction restraining all the defendants from drawing on their account with deft. 1, Bank of China.An 'ad interim' injunction was at first granted against defendants Nos. 1 to 10. Finally, after hearing objections raised by these defendants the learned Subordinate Judge confirmed the injunc...
The Calcutta Pinjrapole Society Vs. S. Banerjee, Member, Board of Reve ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-11-1951
Reported in: AIR1952Cal891
ORDERBose, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for an appropriate writ directing the opposite parties to forbear from depriving the petitioner of its property at Kan-chrapara which has been sought to be acquired under the West Bengal Land Development and Planning Act, (Act xxI of 1948) 1948.2. The petitioner is a society formed and registered under the Societies Registration Act of 1860. This society owned and was possessed of 7,997 acres of land at Kanchrapara out of which 4,937 acres were in has possession of the society and the rest was tenanted land. It appears that 3,57871 acres of land out of 7997 acres were received by way of donation from philanthropic persons. The petitioner society had established six branches for carrying out the purposes of the society at Kanchrapara, Sodepur, Lilooah, Ovaria, Chakolia and Hazaribagh. In the year 1943-44, 5,000 acres of land were requisitioned by the Government under the Defence of India Rules for the ...
Allen Berry and Co. Ltd. Vs. A. Das Gupta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-10-1951
Reported in: AIR1952Cal850
ORDERBose, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution for an appropriate writ directing the Chairman and Members of a Court of Enquiry appointed by the Government under the Industrial Disputes Act to cancel or recall an order passed by them and dated 8-5-1951.2. In July and August 1946 the petitioner company purchased from the Government of India a large number of vehicles which the Government disposed of as surplus. Such vehicles were parked in five depots viz., Jodhpur, Sodepur, Ondal, Brooklyn and Konnagar. As the vehicles required repair and reconditioning the company set up establishments at these five depots for carrying out the work of reconditioning and repair. Workmen were recruited and employed at such establishments. The establishments carried on work smoothly for some time but thereafter the business gradually deteriorated and the petitioner company had to economise expenses and was ultimately obliged to close down the depots between June 1949 and Jul...
Kamarhatty Co. Ltd. Vs. Abdul Samad
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-07-1951
Reported in: AIR1953Cal74,56CWN311,(1952)ILLJ490Cal
Harries, C.J.1. This is a revision praying that an order of the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation granting the opposite party compensation to the amount of Rs. 283-8-0 together with Rs. 10 costs be set aside. 2. The opposite party Abdul Samad claimed a sum of Rs. 882 as compensation from the petitioners, the Kamarhatty Jute Mills Co. Ltd., who were his employers. He alleged that sometime in the month of March 1925 he sustained an accident whilst on duty in the engine department of the petitioners' factory and as a result received personal injuries which resulted in a loss of capacity for work. The accident was concerned with some machinery in the factory and the opposite party's right hand, it is said, was caught in this machinery and the thumb and index finger damaged. Eventually, it is said, the first phalanx of the thumb and half the index finger were removed by amputation. 3. No claim for compensation was made in this case until 3-8-1950 over twenty-five years after t...
Nrisinha Kumar Sinha Vs. the Returning Officer, for the Constituency o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-06-1951
Reported in: AIR1953Cal98,56CWN113
ORDERBose, J.1. This is an application under Atricle 226 of the Constitution for an appropriate writ against the respondent for cancellation of an order of rejection of nomination papers of the petitioner and for a direction upon the respondent to hold the scrutiny of the nomination papers according to law.2. The petitioner is a resident of Ballia and is a duly recorded voter in Part A of original roll of Mouza Ballia in the constituency of Barwan-Khargram for the first general election of members to the West Bengal Legislative Assembly. The petitioner who was a candidate for election from the said constituency filed three nomination papers before the respondent on the 19th November, 1951. On the 21st of November, 1951, the respondent scrutinised the nomination papers of the petitioner but rejected the same on the ground that the nomination papers described the West Bengal Legislative Assembly as the West Bengal State Legislative Assembly. The respondent was of the opinion, that the We...
Shri Ganesh Jute Mills Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-06-1951
Reported in: AIR1953Cal324
ORDERBose, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution, for an appropriate Writ for cancellation of the demands made by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 under Notification dated 8-11-1950, asking for a sum of Rs. 9, 401/10/6 to be paid by the petitioner and for direction on the said respondents to forbear from giving effect to that Notification.2. The facts are that by a contract entered into with the Government of India, Ministry of Industry and Supply, dated 1st September 1948, the petitioner agreed to supply some hessian cloth to the Government of India. The contract provided inter alia that the prices shown in that contract were exclusive of the Bengal sales Tax and the Government of India would arrange direct payment of sales tax to the Government of West Bengal if it is found ultimately that sales tax is payable in respect of the said contract.3. Pursuant to the said contract, the petitioner supplied goods to the Government of India and charged the Government of ...
The State Vs. Sadananda Darji and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-06-1951
Reported in: AIR1952Cal563
P.B. Mukharji, J.1. This is a reference to us from the District Magistrate of Midnapur under Section 185(1), Criminal P. C. That section provides that'Whenever a question arises as to which of two or more Courts subordinate to the same High Court ought to inquire into or try any offence, it shall be decided by that High Court.'2. The question here before us on this Letter of Reference relates to two 'chars', Gurudaha 'char' and Gurgurahti 'char', in the bed of river Rupnarayan which runs between the two districts of Midnapur and Howrah. The question is in which district, Midnapur or Howrah are these two 'chars' situate. The question arises out of certain proceedings under Section 147/324, Penal Code in which the place of occurrence is said to be these two 'chars'. We have to determine which of the two Courts of Midnapur and Howrah has the jurisdiction to try these proceedings.3. In the letter of reference of the District Magistrate he makes no statement or comment. He has only forwarde...
Badri Prosad Vs. State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-05-1951
Reported in: AIR1953Cal28,56CWN406
P.B. Mukharji, J. 1. This is an application for bail under Section 498, Criminal P. C. The central question in this application is, how far the powers of the Court to grant bail have been cut down by Section 13A, Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, as amended.2. It is necessary to state briefly the relevant facts leading up to this application. The petitioner is an accused charged under Section 7 (2), Essential Supplies Act. The prosecution case, briefly, is that on the morning of 14-10-1951 at about 5/15 A. M. the petitioner was found driving lorry No. CH-1746 containing bags of rice coming along the Grand Trunk Road from Magra side being piloted by another lorry No. CH-519 which was proceeding a little ahead of lorry No. CH-1746. On this lorry No. 1746 was found rice weighing 151 mds. contained in 77 hags. This lorry was being driven by the petitioner and there was another man named Lakshminarayan, who was sitting by the side of the petitioner who was driving the lorry. The pr...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »