Kolkata Court February 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.
India Hosiery Works Vs. Bharat Woollen Mills Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-06-1953
Reported in: AIR1953Cal488,57CWN500
Chakravartti, C.J.1. This appeal involves a short point under the Arbitration Act, 1940, arising out of the following facts.2. On 25-8-1951, a contract was entered into between the appellant, The India Plosiery Works, and the respondent, Bharat Woollen Mills Ltd., by which the respondent agreed to- sell and the appellant agreed to buy 10,000 lbs. of woollen yarn at a certain price, the goods to be delivered by a certain date. The contract contained the following arbitration clause: 'All disputes whatsoever arising in or out of or in connection with the said contract or arising in any way whatsoever in connection with any other contract for the supply of goods by the Company to the Buyers shall be referred to arbitration at Calcutta. Thedecision of its Tribunal of Arbitration shall be final and binding on both parties, either of whom may make the same a Rule of Court.'3. On 28-3-1952, the respondent filed an application on the Original Side of this Court for an order under Section 20, A...
Bibhuti Bhusan and ors. Vs. Shib Krishna and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-05-1953
Reported in: AIR1953Cal624,57CWN296
ORDERK.C. Chunder, J.1. This Rule was issued by my learned brother P.N. Mookerjee J. in connection with an ejectment appeal before the special Bench of the Calcutta Court of Small Causes. It appears from unreported decision produced before me in -- 'N.K. Dey & Sons v. Eastern Stock & Agency Ltd.', Civil Revn. Case No. 1749 of 1951 (Cal) (A) that P. N. Mookerjee J. appears to be of the opinion that a revision was the proper procedure in the High Court against an appellate order of the Court of Small Causes. A Division Bench has held that a second appeal is the proper procedure. The matter is before a Full Bench. As I am a single Judge, I am bound by the Division Bench decision that the procedure will be that of a second appeal but as P. N. Mookerjee J. admitted it as a Civil Revision I direct that this be treated as a second appeal. So long as the matter of Second Appeal and Civil Revision is not set at rest by the Full Bench it will be better to treat such Revision Applications as Seco...
Surendra Nath Vs. Tarasashi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-05-1953
Reported in: AIR1953Cal800,57CWN298
K.C. Chunder, J. 1. This is an appeal against an appellate judgment of the Special Appellate Bench of the Court of Small Causes, Calcutta, affirming that of the Judge, 6th Bench. It appears that an ejectment order was passed by the Small Cause Court Judge. An appeal was filed to the Special Bench. It appears and cannot be contested from the papers on record that at the time when this ejectment decree was passed a formal decree as required under the Code of Civil Procedure in the form prescribed thereunder was not drawn up in that Court.Indeed, till the High Court pointed out that a formal decree was necessary in view of the changes introduced by the Rent Control Act that the question of filing a decree ever arose. Indeed, in the present case, the so called decree on record is what has been always known in the court of Small Causes, Calcutta as an after-judgment statement and as it appears that there was never the practice of filing an after judgment statement in any appeal in the Calcu...
Sm. Gurai Bewa and anr. Vs. Narayan Prosad Jana
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-04-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal531
J.P. Mitter, J. 1. This is a petition for revision of an order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Midna-pore, whereby he set aside an order of discharge under Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and directed the petitioners' commitment to the Court of Session on a charge Under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The only question for decision is whether in view of the evidence and all the surrounding circumstances of the ease the learned Magistrate's order of discharge of the petitioners was a proper one. It has been argued by Mr. Mukher-jee i'or the petitioners that Ss. 209, 210, 211 and 213 of the Code of Criminal Procedure clearly show that the learned Magistrate had jurisdiction to come to his own conclusion as to the credibility of the evidence before him and that if he was minded to disregard that evidence and to hold that no charge could be framed thereupon, the order of discharge could not be assailed. Mr. Mukherjee further argued that the Magistrate's duty...
In Re: Suburban Bank Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-03-1953
Reported in: AIR1953Cal487,[1953]23CompCas285(Cal)
ORDERS.R. Das Gupta, J.1. I make the following order:(a) The payment of the Provident Fund to Mr. Chowdhuri's clients will be made on the basis that the total amount, as appearing in the books of the Bank, contributed by the staff and by the Bank is Rs. 25,615-12-0. (b) I declare that Mr. Chowdhuri's clients, namely - 1. Provash Chandra Cheena of No. 12, Froddonath Lane, Calcutta, 2. Amal Kumar Chatterjee of No. 287 1B, Jhamapukur Lane, Calcutta, 3. Ashit Ranjan Das of No. 57, Cossipore Road in the suburbs of Calcutta, 4. Dilip Kumar Ghosh of No. 17, Jhamaphukur Lane, Calcutta, 5. Rajendra Kumar Chakraborty of No. 6, Muralidhar Sen Lane, Calcutta, 6, Sushil Kumar Majumdar of No. 19, Strand Road, Calcutta., 7. Kanai Charan Maity of No. 12, Bipradas Street, Calcutta, are entitled to their wages from 1st May upto the end of August 1948 and they will rank as preferential creditors in respect of wages for the last two months i.e. July and August 1948 and for the wages for the remaining mont...
Maulvi Miah (Maulavi and Co.) Vs. Sashanko Mohan Guha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-03-1953
Reported in: AIR1953Cal600,57CWN300
Guha J.1. This application under Section 115, C. P. C. by a tenant defendant is directed against an order dated 26-7-52 under Section 14(4), West Bengal Premises Rent Control Act, 1950, in an ejectment suit brought against him by the plaintiff opposite party. In that suit the plaintiff made an application for directing the defendant 'to deposit all arrears and current dues month by month as provided in Section 14(4) of the Act.' This petition was disposed of by the lower Court after contest by the following order passed on 12-3-52 :'Parties are ready Heard both sides' lawyers regarding petition under Section 14(4) of the Act. Parties have filed a statement of account. It appears from it that Rs. 88/- is in arrears up to February 1952. Hence ordered that the defendant be directed to deposit Rs. 88/- within 15 days from the date. He is further directed to deposit rent at the rate of Rs. 16-8 per month from month to month to be deposited within 15 days of the month following for which the...
Suburban Bank, Ltd., in Re.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-03-1953
Reported in: [1953]24ITR67(Cal)
ORDERI make the following order :-The payment of the Provident Fund to Mr. Chowdhuris clients will be made on the basis that the total amount, as appearing in the books of the bank, contributed by the staff and by the bank is Rs. 25,615-12-0.I declare that Mr. Chowdhuris clients, namely-1. Provash Chandra Cheena of No. 12, Proddonath Lane, Calcutta, 2. Amal Kumar Chatterjee of No, 28/IB, Jhamapukur Lane, Calcutta, 3. Ashit Ranjan Das of No. 57, Cossipore Road in the suburbs of Calcutta, 4. Dilip Kumar Ghosh of No. 17, Jhamaphukur Lane, Calcutta, 5. Rajendra Kumar Chakraborty of No, 6, Muralidhar Sen Lane, Calcutta, 6. Sushil Kumar Majumdar of No. 19, Strand Road, Calcutta, 7. Kanai Charan Maity of No. 12, Bipradas Street, Calcutta, are entittled to their wages from 1st May upto the end of August, 1948, and they rank as preferential creditors in respect of wages for the last two months, i. e. July and August, 1948, and for the wages for the remaining months they would be treated as ordi...
Atul Chandra Roy Vs. Sm. Charubala Dasi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-02-1953
Reported in: AIR1953Cal466
Renupada Mukherjee, J.1. This second appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff landlord whose claim for produce rent his been proportionately reduced by the courts below owing to deterioration of a part of the tenancy land on account of deposit of sand. In the trial court, the plaintiff claimed cash rent at Rs. 24-12-17 gandas per year and the value of 'sanja' paddy at 1 ara 9 kuris and 3 mans for the years. 1349 B. S. to six months of 1351 B. S. with cesses and damages.2. The suit was contested in the trial court on three questions, namely, (1) what was the measure of an ara, kuri and man in terms of maunds and seers, (2) what amount of cesses is recoverable by the plaintiff and (3) whether the defendants can get proportionate reduction of rent.3. The decision of the lower appellate court has not been challenged by the appellant as regards the first two questions. Only the third question viz., whether the defendants are entitled to reduction of 'sanja' rent on account of deterioratio...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›