Kolkata Court April 1952 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.
Sasanka Sekhar Hazra and anr. Vs. Charu Chandra Dutta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-08-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Cal669
Guha, J.1. This appeal by the plaintiff arises out of a suit for declaration of title and confirmation of possession in respect of C. S. plot No. 8041 measuring 3.02 acres of Shali land recorded in the khatian No, 2766 of Mouza Bara Balun in the name of pro forma defendants 2 to 4. The plaintiff who was a mortgagee purchased the above holding by a kabala on 28-10-1940. In execution of a rent decree, however, the same holding is alleged to have been purchased by the landlord defendant on 20-8-1940. In the execution petition, sale proclamation and the sale certificate there is alleged to have been misdescription of the holding in that plot numbers were described therein as C. S. plots 12049, 12050 and 12051 (instead of C. S. plot 8041) and the area was also wrongly stated to be 90 acres instead of 3.02 acres. On an application for amendment to the executing Court by the defendants appellants who alleged that they detected the mistake at the time of taking delivery of possession through C...
Corporation of Calcutta Vs. Sailendra Nath Ghosh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-07-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Cal202,56CWN779
R.P. Mookerjee, J.1. This is an appeal on behalf of the Corporation of Calcutta and arises out of proceedings initiated by the assessees under Section 141, Calcutta Municipal Act, against the decision of the Deputy Executive Officer about intermediate valuation in respectof premises No. 92, Beltola Road, Calcutta, with effect from the third quarter of 1948-49.2. The objections raised by the assessees before the learned Judge, Court of Small Causes, Sealdah, were accepted and it was ordered that the assessment made by the First Deputy Executive Officer be cancelled and vacated.3. The principal point raised in this appeal is whether the Corporation is entitled to assess rates on structures which had been constructed without obtaining the sanction of the Corporation and they came within the category of unauthorised buildings. Two other points which also were raised will be considered later on.4. To appreciate the first point raised it is necessary to refer to some of the relevant facts. P...
Naresh Chandra Sanyal Vs. the Union of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-07-1952
Reported in: AIR1952Cal757,56CWN539
ORDERBose, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution for an appropriate 'Writ for quashing of certain orders passed by the Authorities of the Assam Railway against the petitioner reducing the petitioner from the rank of a Station Muster to a Signaller.2. The petitioner was posted as Station Master at Dinhata which was in the State of Cooch-Behar prior to 1-1-1950 when Cooch-Behar was absorbed into the State of West Bengal. In January 1949 while the petitioner was posted at Dinhata Station he was charged with offences of serious misconduct involving the offence of forgery. On 14-2-1949 the petitioner sent a reply to the charge sheet. On 18-3-1949 the petitioner was summoned to the office of the Deputy Chief Transportation Superintendent who held a departmental enquiry into the conduct of the petitioner. It is alleged in the petition that in holding this departmental enquiry, all the statutory rules relating to such enquiry were not observed. Particulars of such i...
Ansumali Majumdar and ors. Vs. the State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-1952
Reported in: AIR1952Cal632,56CWN711
Harries, C.J.1. Miscellaneous Case No. 325 of 1951 concerns an application for a writ of habeas corpus made by one Ansumali Majumdar on behalf of Dr. Ranen Sen, who has been elected a member of the West Bengal Legislative Assembly, and Sri Bhupesh Chandra Gupta who has been elected a member of the Council of States. Both these persons are detained under orders made under the Preventive Detention Act.2. Miscellaneous Case No. 52 of 1952 concerns an application by Benoy Krishna Chowdhury, Ganesh Ghosh and Dr. Ranen Sen for a writ of habeas corpus. As I have stated earlier, Dr. Ranen Sen is a member of the West Bengal Legislative Assembly under detention and so also are Benoy Krishna, Chowdhury and Ganesh Ghosh members of that assembly.3. The common point in both these cases is whether persons returned as members of a State Legislative Assembly or the Council of States can be detained under the provisions of the Preventive Detention Act whilst their membership of the Assembly or the Counc...
J.K. Gupta and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-1952
Reported in: AIR1952Cal644,56CWN701
Harries, C.J.1. In this case a Rule was issued upon the State of West Bengal and upon the Special Judge hearing the case to show cause why the records of the case should not be transferred to this Court under Article 228 of the Constitution of India in order that this Court should decide a constitutional point involved in the case, namely, whether Section 4(1) of the West Bengal Criminal Law Amendment (Special Courts) Act, 1949 was ultra vires the Constitution and whether in consequence the Special Judge had any jurisdiction to hear and decide the case.2. At the instance of the special police establishment investigation proceeded against the petitioners in respect of various offences under Sections. 120B/406, Penal Code, Sections. 467, 468 and 477A, Penal Code and those sections read with Section 109, Penal Code. By a notification of the Judicial Department of the Government of West Bengal No. 2072J., dated April 21, 1950 the case was allotted to the Special Court of the Special Judge ...
Ram Kissen Chandgothia and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-1952
Reported in: AIR1952Cal639,56CWN659
Harries, C.J.1. Misc. Case No. 288 of 1951/ In this case, a Rule was issued on the State of West Bengal and upon the Judges constituting a Special Tribunal hearing criminal charges against the petitioners to show cause why the records of the case should not be transferred to this Court under Article 228 of the Constitution to enable this Court to decide a constitutional point involved in the case, namely, whether the Tribunal hearing the charges had any jurisdiction so to do.2. The learned Advocate General on behalf of the State appeared to show cause and we have heard full argument on all the points involved by counsel on both sides. The usual practice is on hearing the petitioner to call for the records and then hear both parties. But in order to shorten proceedings both parties have been heard as if the records had been called for and were in this Court. It has been agreed that the decision of this Bench of the Rule will finally dispose of the matter and that it will not be necessar...
Sasadhar Sarkar Vs. State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-03-1952
Reported in: AIR1952Cal627,56CWN485
S.R. Das Gupta, J.1. This is an application for revision of an order of the Additional Sessions Judge, 24-Parganas, affirming an order of a Magistrate, 1st Class, Alipore, convicting the petitioner under Section 408, Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one year.2. The prosecution case shortly stated is as follows. The petitioner was an employee of the complainant, Manibhusan Pal who had a goldsmith shop at No. 20, Orphangunge Market, Kidderpore. The petitioner, was entrusted with silver ornaments weighing 4108 bharis and odd annas to be sold at different places outside Calcutta. The petitioner along with his co-employee, one San'tosh Pal, went outside Calcutta and sold some of those ornaments and on return to the shop did not see the complainant or wait for him. He left the unsold ornaments in the shop but went home with the sum of Rs. 2796-9-6 being the...
Lalchand and Sons Vs. Corporation of Calcutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-03-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Cal428,57CWN259
R.P. Mookerjee, J.1. The principal question raised by the assessee in this appeal under Section 142(3), Calcutta Municipal Act is as to how the 'estimated present value of the land valued with the building as part of the same premises' is to be made under Clause (b) of Section 127 of the same Act. Premises No. 76, Lower Circular Road covers an area of over 184 cottas and is in the occupation of the owner. There are three different kinds of buildings; one two-storeyed building of which the upper floor is used for residential purposes and the ground floor for the location of a press and godown --belonging to the owner; certain big corrugated iron sheds are also used by the owner for business purposes; and over another portion there is a bustee, the structures having been condemned by the Corporation as being dangerous, but still occupied. As the premises continued to be in the occupation of the owners the determination of the rates must be under Clause (b) of Section 127, Calcutta Munici...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›