Kolkata Court July 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.
Sukumar Banerjee Vs. Hiralal Chatterjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-1952
Reported in: AIR1954Cal48,57CWN743
ORDERChunder, J.1. This Rule was issued at the instance of the complainant against an appellate order of acquittal by the Additional Sessions Judge 24 Parganas, reversing the conviction under Section 420, Penal Code and sentence of three months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-of the accused opposite party passed by a Magistrate, first class, Sealdah.2. It is said by the complainant that on the basis of what he alleges to be a bogus order, the accused obtained a large sum of money from the complainant and gave him a false cheque which was dishonoured. The Magistrate convicted the accused. On appeal the Sessions Judge proceeded to exclude a large part of the oral evidence of prosecution witnesses believed by the trial Court, under Section 92, Evidence Act. It is regrettable that sessions Judges are for-getting even the Indian Evidence Act. The complainant and his witness said that the accused held out that the complainant was going to make the supplies as the sub-contracto...
Taru Bala Roy Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Cal307,56CWN738
K.C. Chunder, J. 1. This is an appeal against the conviction of the appellant under Section 73 of the Essential Supplies Act, 1946, for contravention of Clause 9 of the Calcutta Industrial Area Rationing Regulation, 1943, by a Presidency Magistrate of Calcutta and sentence of Rs. 500/- as fine. It is said that the accused possessed two sets of ration cards--one in Beadon Street and another taken from North Barrackpore. Really the two sets of cards did not belong to the accused as the head of the family. The accused has a husband and the set of cards of North Barrackpore are said to have been issued in the name of the accused's husband as the head of the family, whilst the cards taken at Beadon Street, Calcutta, were issued in the name of the accused as the head of the family. The learned Magistrate's judgment does not show that the accused did not take the cards lawfully in Beadon Street, while some one else may have taken wrong or illegal cards at Barrackpore. This is the first defect...
U. Srinivas Malliah and anr. Vs. Krishna Kumar Chatterjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-1952
Reported in: AIR1952Cal804
ORDERBose, J.1. This is an application for an interlocutory injunction restraining the defendants, their agents and servants from applying for registration to the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies of Calcutta or elsewhere and getting registered under the Societies Registration Act 1860 an association under the name of the Indian National Congress or name similar to the same and also for injunction restraining the defendants from inviting or receiving any subscriptions or donations or acquiring any property in the name of the association so proposed to be registered under the Societies Registration Act 1860.2. The case of the petitioners is that the Indian National Congress which is the greatest political organisation in India, was started in the year 1885. It has various political, social, cultural, economic and benevolent activities. The headquarters of the organisation are at New Delhi and it has branches and committees in all the States in India and in the various districts in the ...
Satya Charan Sarkar and ors. Vs. Mohanta Rudrananda Giri and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Cal716,57CWN524
K.C. Chunder, J. 1. This is an appeal against an appellate decree of the Subordinate Judge of Malda reversing that of the Munsif, 1st Court of the same place. The facts as far as necessary for decision of this second appeal are not very much in dispute. 2. It appears that one Mohanta Rudrananda Giri Goswami sued on behalf of the Hindu villagers of five villages for recovery of possession of 'Certain properties from the defendants. He brought the suit in a representative capacity under Order 1, Rule 8, Civil P. C. No sanction under Section 92, Civil P. C. was taken or even applied for. It is clear that in the Settlement Record of Rights this property was stated as 'Jimma dakhal' Abhoy Charan Sarkar 'gramya Sadharan pakshay' and the property is shown as the property of Ratanti Kalimata for Kali 'pujah'. The present defendants are said to be the custodians of the property on the death of Abhoy Charan Sarkar. The suit was for removal of these defendants as they had neglected to perform the...
Surja Kumar Sardar Vs. Manmatha Nath Naskar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Cal200,56CWN845
K.C. Chunder, J. 1. This is an appeal against an appellate decree of the Subordinate Judge, Sixth Court, 24 Parganas, reversing that of the Munsif, Second Court, Baruipore. 2. It appears that the plaintiff who is a purchaser from a Hindu widow, one Bhudimoni Dassi, claimed the property in suit alleging that Bhudimoni inherited the property from, her husband Debendra and the plaintiff purchased the same from Bhudimoni. Bhudimoni is still alive. Debendra left also a daughter Mangala who died leaving a son and the son is also dead. 3. The Principal contesting defendant is Manmatha, the husband of Mangala. His only defence was that Bhudimoni having been unchaste during the life of the husband, she did not inherit and therefore Mangala inherited and after Mangala, Mangala's son and Manmatha is now the owner as the only heir of the son. 4. Therefore the only pertinent questions were the question of unehastity prior to the death of the husband and secondly a question which had not been consid...
Subala Devi Vs. Corporation of Calcutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Cal357,57CWN461
ORDERP.B. Mukharji, J.1. This is a Rule directed against the order of the, Municipal Magistrate of Calcutta dated 4-3-1952 convicting the petitioner under Section 488(2), Calcutta Municipal Act, 1923, and sentencing her to a daily fine of Annas lour from 14-3-1950 being the date of her first conviction under Section 488(1) of that Act amounting to a total fine of Rs. 180-4-0 upto 4-3-1952 which is the date of the order now complained of.2. The facts of the case may be briefly stated. The petitioner Subalabala Devi is the owner of premises No. 27/2, Jugal Kishore Das Lane. She was required by the Corporation 'to secure and repair the entire building except the portion collapsed and requisitioned to be demolished within seven days.'This was a requisition by the Corporation under Rule 4(1) of Schedule 18, Calcutta Municipal Act. She was convicted on 14-3-1950 under Section 488(1), Calcutta Municipal Act read with Rule 4(1) of Schedule 18 for non-compliance with the requisition. Even after...
Shree Shew Sakti Oil Mills Ltd. and anr. Vs. Corporation of Calcutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Cal384,57CWN120
K.C. Chunder, J. 1. This is an appeal against the conviction of the appellants under Section 488 read with Section 412, Calcutta Municipal Act. The appellants, it is said, had exposed for sale about 200 maunds of mustard oil on 30-6-1949. The Food Inspector, Dr. Saha, the District Health Officer District No. 1, and Dr. S.K. Dey, the Public Analyst of the Calcutta Corporation visited the mill premises at 153, Upper Circuler Road and took three samples in the presence of the officers of the Company. One sample according to the rules was left with the appellants and it is now said that the sample was lost. The other two samples were analysed by the Public Analyst and they had also been analysed by the Director of Public Health and both found that the reaction by ferric chloride test, which is a specific for argemone oil, was positive and both found that argemone oil was present in those samples of mustard oil. It appears that sometime after the case had been proceeding the accused persons...
Ganendra Kumar Vs. Narayan Chandra and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Cal562
ORDERP.B. Mukherji, J. 1. This is an application for final decree in a Mortgage Suit under Section 34(1)(a)(ii), Bengal Money Lenders Act.2. The facts are simple.3. On 22-2-1951, the usual preliminary mortgage decree was passed in this suit declaring the applicant as the first mortgagee under the two Indentures of Mortgage dated 22-12-1941 and 22-12-1945 and the amounts due to the applicant for principal and interest up to the date of that decree were Rs. 58,450/-and Rs. 71,438-14-3 respectively on the two mortgages. The decree provided that the amounts due to the applicant for principal and interest and also costs awarded thereunder should be paid, in four equal annual instalments. It provided that in default of payment the applicant would be at liberty to apply for a final decree for sale. Default having taken place, the mortgagee now applies for the final decree, after having given notice to the mortgagors.4. The only point on behalf of the respondents mortgagors is a short point ab...
Annada Prosad and ors. Vs. Manotosan Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-10-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Cal503,56CWN705
ORDERK.C. Chunder, J.1. This is a Rule at the instance of three persons who had been accused under Section 500. Penal Code by the complainant opposite party one Manotosan Roy of having defamed him in an issue of the newspaper, called, the Loke Sevak, dated 20-12-1951.2. It is said that the opposite party was complained against by one Nirapada Mukherjee of criminal acts in connection with collection of the Bills of Nirapada through the People's Bank of Ghatal, of which Monotosan Roy was the Chairman. A short statement of the complaint as made and the action taken on the same appeared in the Loke Sevak. The Magistrate issued process against Manotosan Roy and others. As an item of news this was published in the newspaper.3. Manotosan Roy appears to have been very much ill-advised to rush to a Criminal Court on the ground of defamation instead of vindicating himself in the charge that was brought against him. Exception 4 to Section 500 is as follows: 'It is not defamation to publish substa...
Aswini Kumar Samanta Vs. Manager, Calcutta Electric Supply Corpn. Ltd. ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-09-1952
Reported in: AIR1955Cal249
ORDERBose, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution for an appropriate Writ directing the opposite party No. 1 to supply electricity at premises No. 14, Kalitala Lane, Earanagar, in the district of 24-Parganas.2. The case of the petitioner is that he is a lease-holder for more than 12 years paying as annual rent for the land situate at 14 Kalitala Lane, Baranagar, in the district of 24-Parganas under the Zamindars who are opposite parties Nos. 2, 3 and 4. It is alleged that the petitioner has erected a pucca structure of his own on the land and he has become a permanent leaseholder. It appears that the petitioner applied to the opposite party No. 1 for supply of electricity at the said premises. An inspector of the opposite party No. 1 came to the petitioner's said premises for inspection. It is alleged that the opposite parties Nos. 2, 3 and 4 came to know about this application of the petitioner to the opposite party No. 1 for the supply of electricity to the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »