Kolkata Court January 1953 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.
Mohari Lall and anr. Vs. the Corporation of Calcutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-07-1953
Reported in: AIR1953Cal561,57CWN248
K.C. Chunder, J. 1. This is an appeal against a conviction and sentence on the two accused persons under Section 406, Calcutta Municipal Act, (Bengal Act 3 of 1923) read with Section 488. Mohari Lall is the proprietor of the shop and Sower Lall was acting as the actual salesman. The shop is situated at 24/1, Sir Hariram Goenka 'Street, Calcutta. A Food Inspector of the Calcutta Corporation visited the shop. His evidence is that he found actually adulterated turmeric was being sold to customers. He purchased a sample of the same. What is more, he found turmeric was being ground with calcium carbonate in a machine near where the accused salesman was actually selling the article. He observed all the necessary requisites for the taking of such a sample and for sending the same to the Public Analyst of the Calcutta Corporation. The certificate of the Public Analyst is that even on physical examination small solid particles of calcium carbonate were visible to naked eye and chemical examinat...
indra Kumar Karnani Vs. Sundardas Thackersey and Bros.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-07-1953
Reported in: AIR1953Cal570,57CWN239
Chakravartti, C.J.1. This Rule raises an interesting question of first impression under the Rent Control Act of 1950.2. The facts are simple. The opposite party is the tenant in respect of Godown No. 9B, situated at 13C, Lower Chitpore Road and was the tenant in respect of the same premises in December 1941 as well. In 1941, the rent was RSection 3307- per month, as has been found by the authorities below. It has also been found that with effect from December, 1948, the rent was increased to Rs. 508-3-0 per month. On 30-8-1950, the opposite party made an application for standardization of the rent and the Rent Controller fixed the standard rent at Rs 363/- per month. He arrived at that figure by adding ten per cent, to the contractual rent of Rs. 330/- which was being paid in December, 1941. He declined to add anything more, although a rent of Rs. 508-3-0 per month was being paid since December, 1948, for the reason that three years had not elapsed from the date on which the increased ...
Subodh Ranjan Vs. Major N.A. O'Callaghan and Anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-06-1953
Reported in: AIR1953Cal319
ORDERBose, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution for an appropriate writ for cancellation of certain orders passed against the petitioner in March 1951 and on 25-4-1952 imposing certain punishments for misconduct in the discharge of his duties as an Overseer in the Military Engineering Service and also for quashing of an order D/- 10-4-1952 by which the petitioner was discharged from service with effect from 10-7-1952.2. The petitioner's case is that he was appointed as Overseer in the Military Engineering Service in 1940 under the Government of India. In 1942 he was promoted to the post of Sub-Divisional Officer which was re-designated as Superintendent, Grade I, with effect from January 1947. On 16-6-1949 a departmental enquiry was started against the petitioner on a charge of throwing away certain stores which were the property of Fort William. As a result, of the enquiry a warning order was made against the petitioner in or about March 1951. As the autho...
Sajjad HossaIn Vs. Askari Mirza
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-06-1953
Reported in: AIR1953Cal791,57CWN682
ORDERK.C. Chunder, J. 1. This Rule was issued at the instance of an accused person for quashing of proceedings. Under Section 198, Criminal P. C., it is necessary that a case under Section 500, Penal Code must be instituted by a petition of complaint by the person defamed himself. The complaint must be in accordance with the definition of a complaint, given in the Code of Criminal Procedure. In the present case, all that was asked for by the person who petitioned the Magistrate was for an order upon the accused summoned to show cause why proceedings should not be taken against him. There was no complaint as required and therefore the present proceedings must be quashed leaving it open to the complainant, if so advised, to file a proper complaint.2. The Rule is therefore made absolute.The accused is discharged from his bail bond....
Chandmul Agarwalla and ors. Vs. Lachminarayan Dalmia
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-05-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal77,57CWN369
Chakravartti, C.J.1. These are twelve Rules of a somewhat varied composition. They concern five tenancies, each in respect of one or more rooms in premises No. 124 Chattaranjan Avenue, Calcutta, and all held under the same landlord. The tenants of all the tenancies made applications for standardization of the rent and the Rent Controller fixed the standard rent at certain amounts. Neither the landlord nor the tenants were satisfied and both parties preferred appeals. There were thus ten appeals. The appellate Court varied the rent to a certain extent in favour of the landlord, but did not vary it to an extent sufficient to satisfy him. As the rent was increased, naturally, the tenants were also dissatisfied with the decision of the appellate Court. Thereafter, both sides moved this Court under Section 32(4), Rent Control Act. As there had been two appeals in respect of each tenancy in the Court below, one by the tenant and the other by the landlord, there were ten applications by the t...
Jyotirindra NaraIn Sinha Vs. Commr. for the Board of Agricultural Inco ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-05-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal555,57CWN287
Das, J. 1. This is a Reference by the Board of Agricultural Income-tax, Assam, under Section 28 (2), Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act of 1939.2. This case has a chequered history, and has been to several Courts and Tribunals.3. The assessee is Sri Jyotirindra Narayan Sinha Choudhury, a co-sharer in a Zemindary known as Parbatjoar Estate. The share of the assessee is 8 annas 9 pies. In September, 1941, the assessee filed a return of his agricultural income. In column 6 (ii) of Schedule A to his return which is headed as selamis or premia received by the landlords for settlement of waste lands or abandoned holdings for agricultural purposes etc an item of Rs. 2025-3-11 1/4 pies was shown. In a letter accompanying the return the assessee stated that the amount collected as selamis or premia for waste lands and abandoned holdings, namely, Rs. 9331-9-4 ps had not been shown as this was not subject to assessment of agricultural income-tax.4. The Agricultural Income-tax Officer, however, mad...
Jyotirindra NaraIn Sinha Choudhury Vs. Commissioner for the Board of A ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-05-1953
Reported in: [1953]24ITR158(Cal)
DAS, J.-This is a reference by the Board of Agricultural Income-tax, Assam, under Section 28 (2) of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act of 1939.This case has chequered history and has been to several Courts and Tribunals.The assessee is Sir Jyotirindra Narayan Sinha Choudhary a cosharer is a zemindary knows as Parbatjoar Estate. The share of the assessee is 8 annas 9 pies. In September, 1941, the assessee filed a return which is of his agricultural income. In column 6 (ii) of Schedule A to his return which is headed as selamis or premia received by the landlords for settlement of waste lands or abandoned holdings for agricultural purposes etc. an item of Rs. 2,025-3-11 was shown. In a letter accompanying the return the assessee stated that the amount collected as selamis or premia for waste lands and abandoned holdings, namely Rs. 9,331-9-4 had not been shown as this was not subject to assessment of agricultural Income-tax.The Agricultural Income-tax Officer, however, made an order o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›