Kolkata Court December 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.
Shaw and Co. Vs. B. Shamaldas and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-23-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal369
P.B. Mukharji, J. 1. This is a battle over technicalities. 2. It is an application by the defendant for dismissal of the suit under Order 9, Rule 5, Civil P. C. The notice of motion was taken out by the defendant firm on 4-9-1953 and by special leave made returnable on 8-9-1953. The notice of motion seeks first for an order that the suit be dismissed and then asks that if the suit be not dismissed, the time for filing written statement be extended. 3. To appreciate the controversy the relevant facts should be set forth. 4. It is a suit for libel where the plaintiff claims Rupees One Lakh as damages against the defendant firm. It was instituted on 7-9-1950. The writ of summons was issued on 15-9-1950 for service on the defendant. The returnable date of the writ of summons was 29-11-1950. Between 18-9-1950 and 25-6-1951, a period of about nine months, the plaintiff took no steps to have the summons served and he did not attend the Sheriff's office for such service. The Sheriff, therefore...
Jayaswal Shipping Company Vs. the Owners and Parties Interested in Ste ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-23-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal415,58CWN468
P.B. Mukharji, J.1. This is an admiralty action in this High Court. It raises an intricate but interesting point of Admiralty Jurisdiction. To put. it graphically, the point of construction raised in the suit is how the words 'domiciled in England or Wales' appearing in Section 5 Of the Admiralty Court Act, 1861 (24 Victoria, Ch. X) can be dovetailed in the topography of India, and when so does, what will be the scope and extent of the meaning of these words. The ancient lumber of admiralty law in India is in need of immediate legislative spring cleaning, so that her citizen of today may be spared in future from the task of solving such problem of Indianising English geography by having to interpret English Statutes.2. Before discussing this point which does not appear to be covered by any decision in India, it is essential to state the accessory facts.3. The suit is instituted by Jayaswal Shipping Company, a registered partnership, against the owners and parties interested in the Stea...
Brohmananda Das Vs. Nagendra Chandra Sarkar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-21-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal224
P.N. Mookerjee, J. 1. The defendant appellant was the tenant under the plaintiff respondent in respect of a part of the ground floor of premises No. 70-A Park Street on a monthly rental of Rs. 45/-. The tenancy was terminated by a notice to quit, dated 30th July, 1949, given by the plaintiff landlord, asking the defendant to quit and vacate on the expiry of the last day of August 1949. On 21st September 1949, the present suit for ejectment was filed before the learned Munsif, 2nd Court, Sealdah. 2. In the plaint an allegation was made substantially to the effect that the tenant was guilty of contravention of Clauses (m), (o) and (p) of Section 108 of the Transfer of Property Act 1882 and was, accordingly, not entitled to the protection of the Rent Control Law. The landlord claimed a decree for ejectment and mesne profits. 3. The suit was contested on various grounds of which only two are material for our present purpose. The first is that the notice to quit is insufficient and, therefo...
Surendra Nath Mukherjee Vs. Lilamohan Singh Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-21-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal474
P.N. Mookerjee, J.1. Respondent No. 2, Abdul Monsur, was the owner of Premises No. 16 Chakraberia Road, North, and he let out the said premises to respondent No. 3 Abdul Hamid at a monthly rental of Rs. 35/-. In or about September 1946, the tenant Abdul Hamid sublet the entire premises to the appellant Surendra Nath Mukherjee who is still in actual occupation of the same. On 8-8-1944, the landlord Abdul Monsur duly gave to his tenant Abdul Hamid a notice to quit asking him to vacate the premises with the end of August 1944 on the allegation that the premises were required by him bona fide for his own use and occupation. The landlord Abdul Monsur applied for and obtained from the Rent Controller on 3-8-1945 the necessary permission to sue for ejectment under the Calcutta House Rent Control Order 1943 which was then in force. No suit, however, was brought until 1-3-1947.In the meantime the Rent Control Order of 1943 had expired and the Calcutta Rent Ordinance of 1946 had come into force ...
Amarendra Narayan Roy Vs. Commr. of Income-tax, West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-18-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal271
ORDERSinha, J. 1. This is a Rule issued upon the opposite parties, the Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal, the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Range V, Calcutta, and the Income Tax Officer, West Dinajpur and Malda, to show cause why a writ in the nature of certiorari should not issue directing them to bring up to this Court the entire proceedings relating to disclosure mentioned in the petition so that the same may be quashed or otherwise dealt with or why a writ in the nature of mandamus should not issue directing them to rescind the said disclosure proceedings or why such other appropriate writs should not be issued or orders made as to this Court may seem fit and proper. 2. The facts of the case are shortly as follows: The petitioner Amarendra Narayan Roy, is a zemindar of Bulbulchandi in the district of Malda, He is the 'karta' of a Mitakshara Hindu undivided family and is assessed as such to income-tax. In due course the assessee filed a return of income-tax ...
Bukhtiarpur Bihar Light Railway Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-17-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal499,[1954]24CompCas507(Cal)
Chakravartti, C.J.1. This appeal has taken an inordinately long time and that has been because the facts are in such a confused state that the learned counsel for both parties found considerable difficulty in getting out of them what they required for their respective purposes. It must also be said that the carriage of the proceedings before the learned Judge below was slovenly to a degree on the part of both parties. They did not seem to have considered it necessary to examine what their opponent was saying, nor to apply their minds to deciding what facts they had themselves to prove in order to obtain an order in their favour.2. The appellant is a public Limited Company which was formed for the purpose of constructing and maintaining a Railway, operating between the Station of Bukhtiarpur on the East Indian Railway and the town of Behar, There appears to have been an agreement between the promoters and certain local authorities which entitled those authorities to take over the Railwa...
Himangshu Bhusan Kar and ors. Vs. Manindra Mohan Saha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-15-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal205,58CWN221
P.N. Mookerjee, J. 1. This appeal arises out of a proceeding in execution. The present appellants who were the defendants in the original suit were the tenants under the plaintiff respondent Manindra Mohan Saha and his brother Jatindra Mohan Sana. These two brothers instituted a suit for ejectment against the defendants appellants and obtained a decree. That decree was put into execution and in the executing court an objection was filed by the judgment debtors under section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The objection which is material for our present purpose arises on the following allegations, viz., that during the pendency of the ejectment suit one of the plaintiffs Jatindra Mohan died on the 22nd November 1950, but the suit was decreed on the 16th June 1951 without any substitution in place of Jatindra and without any step having been taken in that behalf or in consequence of the said death. It is, accordingly, contended that the suit abated and, therefore, the decree passed wa...
Corporation of Calcutta Vs. Krishna Mohan Kundu and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-15-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal254,58CWN324
P.N. Mookerjee, J. 1. In or about November, 1936, the Corporation of Calcutta recovered seven preliminary charge decrees against the respondents or their predecessors for consolidated rates under the Calcutta Municipal Act. These decrees were made final some time in September, 1937 and thereafter they were put into execution in March, 1940.2. In the year 1942, two of the judgment-debtors Krishna Mohan Kundu and Mohini Mohan Kundu applied before the Mathurapur Debt Settlement Board for settlement of their debts including the above decretal dues and, on receipt of the notice under Section 34, Bengal Agricultural Debtors' Act, the Civil Court stayed further proceedings in the execution cases pending before it and when eventually an award was made by the Board in favour of the applicants before it, the execution cases were struck off by the Court on 18-12-1942.3. About three years later, the decree-holder Corporation prayed for fresh execution of the several decrees mentioned above and als...
Bijoy Ranjan Rakshit Vs. State Medical Faculty of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-14-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal193
ORDERSinha, J.1. The facts of this case are shortly as follows:2. The petitioner is a Matriculate of the University of Calcutta. In 1947, he got himself admitted into the Chittagong Medical School in Eastern Pakistan for the purpose of obtaining a L. M. P. degree. In 1948, he passed the primary examination. In February 1950, owing to communal disturbances in Eastern Pakistan, the petitioner and his family came out to India as refugees. After coming to India the petitioner continued his medical studies and got himself admitted into the Burdwan Ronaldshay Medical School which is an institution run by the State Medical Faculty of West Bengal (hereinafter referred to as the 'Faculty'). In November 1950. the petitioner appeared in the Intermediate Examination conducted by the Faculty and out of the three subjects prescribed in such examination the petitioner passed in two subjects, namely Physiology and Pharmacology, but was unsuccessful in the third subject, namely Anatomy.Under rule 4 of ...
Bimal Chand Vs. Chairman, Jiagunj Azimgunj Municipality and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-14-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal285
ORDERSinha, J.1. This is a Rule issued upon the opposite parties to snow cause why appropriate writs should not be issued for the purpose of excluding 172 names from the Final Electoral Roll of the Jiaganj Azimganj Municipality in terms of the order passed by the District Magistrate, Murshidabad, on 18-10-1952, and why the holding of the election on the basis of the Final Electoral Roll, as published, should not be prohibited and for such further order or orders as to the Court may seem fit and proper.2. The facts of this case are as follows: The petitioner is a resident of Begumganj Mohalla of Baluchar within the Jiaganj Azimganj Municipality in the District of Murshidabad. The opposite party No. 1 is the Chairman of the said Municipality. Under Section 21, Bengal Municipal Act (Act 15 of 1932) a committee consisting of the Chairman and two commissioners are appointed by the commissioners of the Municipality at a meeting held' for this purpose and this committee which is (according to...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »