Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1953Cal365,57CWN213
Chakravartti, C.J. 1. This Rule was issued at the instance of an attaching creditor and raises a somewhat novel point.2. The facts are as follows. It appears that opposite party 1, Mrityunjoy Mukherjee, obtained a mortgage decree against opposite parties 2 to 5 who are sons of one Rai Nalinaksha Dutta Bahadur, deceased. That decree was a kind of composite decree passed on 28-7-1934, by consent of parties. The predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner held a money decree against Mrityunjoy and on the strength of that decree he attached the mortgage decree held by his judgment-debtor Mrityunjoy. Thereafter, the judgment-debtor of the mortgage decree made an application under the Bengal Money-lenders Act for reopening the decree and the decree was in fact reopened. A new decree conforming to the provisions of the Bengal Money-lenders Act was passed on 19-11-.1946. I might refer also to another fact which it would be necessary to consider if the second point raised by the petitioner had to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1953Cal467,57CWN205
G.N. Das, J. 1. These two matters are interrelated and arise out of certain proceedings in execution of a decree which was obtained by respondents 1 and 2 against respondent 3 in Suit No. 16 of 1943. The decree was passed on 4-5-1943. The decree was for recovery of money which was due to respondents 1 and 2 in respect of a legacy given to them by one srimati Saila Sudha Devi. The allegation was that the money due under the legacy, had been misappropriated, by respondent 3 who was the executor under the last will of Srimati saila Sudha Devi. Tins decree was executed on certain occasions. Ultimately, on 27-5-1948, the present appellant the petitioner stood surety for the due performance of the decree by her husband, respondent 3, the judgment-debtor.The appellant agreed to pay the decretal dues in certain instalments and in case three consecutive instalments were unpaid she bound herself to pay the decretal dues and as security for payment of the said dues created a charge in respect of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1953Cal621,57CWN482
P.B. Mukharji, J. 1. This is an application to set aside the two awards of the Bengal Chamber at Commerce, each dated 21-12-1951. The dispute is between the seller who is the applicant and the buyer who is the respondent in the matter of a contract of sale of B twills. 2. It is the seller's application to set aside the awards on various grounds. Fourteen different grounds have been urged in para. 23 of the petition. It is unnecessary for me to refer to all these grounds because Mr. D.C. Sethia, learned counsel appearing for the applicant, has abandoned the other grounds except grounds 4, 5, 7 and 11 in para. 23 of the petition. In other words, Mr. Sethia has argued that these two awards should be set aside on the ground first that the arbitrators had no power to make two awards in this case and secondly, on the ground that their award gave damages on the basis of rates exceeding the official ceiling price at the relevant time. The third ground of attack is that the extension of due dat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1953Cal219,57CWN107
Guha, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by S. Fernandez 'alias' Salvador Fernandez who has been convicted under Section 13 read with Section 20, Dangerous Drugs Act in connection with the seizure of a certain quantity of illicit opium. It is alleged that on 24th October 1952, it K. G. Dock, Calcutta Port, he attempted to export and tranship by S. S. Tairea a certain quantity of opium in contravention of Section 7, Dangerous Drugs Act and thereby committed in offence punishable under Section 13 read with 3. 20, Dangerous Drugs Act. According to the prosecution version P. W. 1 W. P. Webber, a Preventive Officer of the Customs Department, received information that the appellant was in possession of some opium on board the ship mentioned above which was lying moored at 10 Kidderpore Dock; that he along with G. K. Das, Preventive Officer, Customs, caught hold of the appellant and took him to Customs for interrogation. It is further alleged that the appellant made a' confessional statemen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1953Cal188,57CWN767
Das, J. 1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff and is directed against the judgment and decree of Sri J. P. Mukherjee, learned Subordinate Judge 6th Court, Alipur, Dt. 24 Parganas, dated 3-2-1948. 2. The suit out of which this appeal has arisen, was instituted on 18-12-1945 against the respondent, the Province of Bengal. The material allegations in the plaint were that the plaintiff was appointed a Rationing Officer by the Province of Bengal on a salary of Rs. 400/-per month, that his appointment was duly notified in the Calcutta Gazette by an order of the Governor, that by a letter dated 22-1-1944 the Deputy Controller of Rationing notified to him, his appointment as Rationing Officer, that he was posted at Panihati and acted as such till 5-6-1944, when he was transferred to Garulia, that on 9-7-1944, he received a copy of an order dated 6-7-1944, passed by the Controller of Rationing, to the effect that he was discharged from service . The plaintiff submitted that the order of dischar...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1953Cal618
ORDERP.B. Mukharji, J. 1. This is an application by Bhudarmull Bazaz carrying on business under the name and style of Shivaramdas Bhudarmal under the Indian Arbitration Act for declaring the Award No. 139 of 1952 of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce dated 13-2-1952 as null and void, and for an order that there was no valid arbitration agreement in the contract dated 16-3-1951. 2. The matter arises out of a transaction relating to sale and purchase of jute goods. On 16-3-51, there was a contract being contract No. 0 by which the petitioner agreed to sell and deliver to the respondent 15000 bags of B. Twills at Rs. 231-10-0 per 100 bags on the terms and conditions contained in a sold note of that date and number passed by the brokers to the petitioner. That contract No. 6 dated 16-3-1951, contained the following arbitration clause: 'All matters, questions, disputes, differences and/ or claims arising out of and/or concerning and/ or in connection with and/or in consequence of relating to th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1954Cal1,57CWN807
S.R. Das Gupta, J.1. This is an appeal against an order of Bachawat J. dismissing an application to set aside an award of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce.2. By a contract No. 3641 dated 8-2-1946 the respondent Fateh Chand Muralidhar sold 12 lacs yards of Hessian cloth to S. Debi Dutt & Co., delivery March to June, 1946. By a contract No. 3637 also dated 8-2-1946 the respondent sold 6 lacs yards of Hessian cloth to Section Debi Dutt & Co., delivery April to June, 1946. By another Contract No. 3637 also dated 8-2-1946 S. Debi Dutt & Co. sold 6 lacs of Hessian cloth to the appellant. By a Contract No. 3662 dated 22-3-1946 the appellant sold back these goods to S. Debi Dutt & Co. The last two contracts were set off against each other and the difference in price became payable by S. Debi Dutt & Co. The respondent delivered to S. Debi Dutt & Co. the March portion of Contract No. 3641 on 25-3-1946 and the April portion thereof on 24-4-1946. The respondent entered into contract No. 155 dated 25...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1953Cal610,57CWN448
P.B. Mukharji, J.1. This is an application for theappointment of a Receiver to enforce what is knownas Balance order on the contributions. The orderwas made on 4-12-1951 and provides:'It is ordered that the said applicant be at libertyto enforce a call on the contributories of the saidbank as set out in the Schedule annexed to theaffidavit of the said applicant and specified inthe Schedule hereunder written for payment ofthe balance of the amounts due in respect of theshares of the said Bank except that such callbe not enforced on the said Promotho NathSanyal.'The applicant in that case was the Official Liquidator of the Dhakuria Banking Corporation Ltd. (In Liquidation).2. In the tabular statement the applicant official Liquidator now before me asks for an order appointing a Receiver of the properties mentioned in Dhakuria and at Bolepur, Santiniketan, more particularly described in paras. 15 and 16 of the petition used in support of this summons. This order is asked as against Sm. Su...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1953Cal667,57CWN435
Chakravartti, C.J.1. The only question of substance argued in this case is one of limitation. The respondent used to be a workman under the appellant -- Keshoram Cotton Mills Ltd. -- and was employed in the hosiery department. In September 1948, he was going up a ladder with a load on his head, when it fell and as the workman himself slipped, the load descended on his left leg and in doing so, passed across his chest and spine. The injury caused by that accident was that he suffered a fracture of the left ankle which has been described as 'Pott's fracture' and some injuries on his chest and spine.2. The workman was absent from duty for a few days, but continued in the employment of the Mill. He was, however, given lighter work. In July 1950, he was apparently asked to return to the job of carrying loads which he was unable to do. Thereupon he was dismissed. The application for compensation was filed in Court on 17-12-1949.3. It is not necessary to refer to the other defences raised by ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1953Cal387,[1953]23CompCas81(Cal),57CWN136
ORDERP.B. Mukharji, J.1. This is an application by the judgment-creditor for the winding up of the company called Ko-Ku-La Ltd. The grounds on which the petition is being prosecuted by the judgment-creditor are first, that the company is unable to pay its debts and secondly, that the statutory notice of demand was given to the company as required by S. 163, Companies Act. The statutory demand is pleaded in para. 9 of the petition and a copy of the demand is annexed to the petition as Ex. B and it is pleaded that it was sent by registered post.2. The facts briefly are as follows: The petitioner instituted a title suit in 1947 in the Subordinate Judge's Court at Asansol claiming possession of certain lands which the company had contracted to purchase from her and Rs. 10,000/- for breach of contract, Rs. 4,000/- for price of cattle and Rs. 1,000/- for deterioration of the cattle and Rs. 2,000/- as the value of the produce of the arable lands and Rs. 1,000/- as damages for demolition of ce...
Tag this Judgment!