Kolkata Court January 1954 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.
Mahadeo Prasad Vs. Sm. Sulekha Sarkar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Cal404
P.N. Mookerjee, J.1. The appellant was a monthly tenant under the respondent landlady in respect of what may be called the garage room at premises No. 171-A Lansdowne Road, Calcutta, at a rental of Rs. 18/- per month. The tenancy was terminated by a notice to quit under Section 111(h), Transfer of Property Act on and from the 1-5-1949 and the tenant having failed to vacate the room in question in terms of the said notice, the present suit for ejectment was filed on the 7-6-1949.2. In the plaint there was a specific allegation that the disputed room was required by the plaintiff landlady bona fide for her own use and occupation, namely, as a garage for her car and, upon such allegation, it was pleaded that the Rent Control Act of 1948 which was then in force would not stand in the way of her getting of a decree for ejectment.3. The defence denied the truth of the plaintiff's allegation and claimed protection under the Rent Control law.4. The learned Munsif accepted the plaintiff's case ...
institute of Chartered Accountants Vs. Debabrata Basu and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Cal513,58CWN391
Chakravartti, C.J.1. This appeal involves an interesting question as to the true construction of Section 30, Chartered Accountants Act, and as to the validity of Regulation 34 framed thereunder. The validity of Clause 4(f) of Form 'L', prescribed for an agreement between a member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants and an articled clerk, is consequential and is also in question.2. The simple facts are as follows. One Sri Debabrata Basu was a Chartered Accountant, and respondent No. 2, Prasanta Kumar Dutt, entered into an agreement with him on 1-4-1950, for service under articles of clerkship. The regulations framed under 'the Chartered Accountants Act provide that such an agreement is to be sent to the Institute of Chartered Accountants for registration. In forwarding the particular agreement to the Institute, Debabrata Basu said that he had omitted clause 4(f) of the standard form, inasmuch as, in his view, that clause was ultra vires the Act.The Institute refused to register th...
Sohonlal Nagarmull Vs. Manick Lal Seal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-18-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Cal352,58CWN313
Chakravartti C.J.1. The appellant, Sohonlal Nagarmull, who was the defendant in a suit decreed 'ex parte', has preferred the present appeal against an order of P. B. Mukharji J., refusing to set aside the 'ex parte' decree. The learned Judge did not deliver a judgment, but statements were made to us from the Bar regarding the ground on which, he dismissed the appellant's application. The learned junior Counsel for both parties, who were in the Court below, stated that a preliminary ground was taken on behalf of the respondent that the application was barred by time and the learned Judge dismissed the application on that ground without entering into its merits.2. Mr. Deb, who appeared before us as theleading Counsel for the respondent, stated that if limitation was the only ground on which the application had been dismissed, he would concede at once that the point should be decided in favour of the appellant. He added that we might proceed to consider the application on its merits or se...
Sailendra Nath Mitra Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Cal373
ORDERG.N. Das, J. 1. The Rule was issued by Mitter J. and Guha Ray J. for quashing the commitment of the petitioner on the ground that there is no evidence to go to the jury. 2. At the hearing of the Rule the learned Judges differed in their opinion. In view of such difference of opinion, by an order of the learned Chief Justice dated 21-12-1953 the case was directed to be placed before me. I have now heard learned advocates for the parties. 3. The prosecution case has been fully set out in the judgment of Guha Ray J. Originally seven persons the petitioner Sailendra Nath Mitra, Barin Ghose, Fazlul Karim, Dhiren Dutt, shib Sankar Ghose, Kalipada Sen Gupta and Kamakshya Mohan Maitra were put on their trial on a charge of conspiracy under Sections 120B/467/419/471, Penal Code. 4. By an order dated 10-12-1951 the accused Kamakshya was tendered a pardon under Section 337, Criminal P. C. Pazlul Karim and Kalipada Sen Gupta absconded during the course of the trial Ultimately by an order date...
Audh Behari Singh Vs. Sailendra Nath Bhattacharjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-13-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Cal339
P.N. Mookerjee, J.1. This appeal arises out of a proceeding under Section 47, Civil P. C. The proceeding was started in connection with a decree for ejectment. That decree was in the following terms :'Plaintiff will get khas possession of Uie suit lands by ejecting the defendant. Defendant will remove the Mandir and other structures in the suit land within 3 months from 30-9-39 and that in default the plaintiff will remove them at the cost of the defendant subject to the condition laid below. If structures other than the Mandir, are not removed by the defendant within three months from that date, they will be removed by the plaintiff at the cost of the defendant as ordered above. But the Mandir will be removed only after obtaining permission from the proper authorities responsible for law and order. If such permission is obtained, plaintiff will remove the Mandir after the expiry of three months from the date of the judgment at the cost of the defendant.' 2. Admittedly, the decree-hold...
indra Kumar Nath Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-13-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Cal375,58CWN374
1. This matter has been laid before me under the provisions of Section 429, Criminal P. C. read with Section 439(1) of the same Code, as Mitter J. and Sen J. who heard the Rule could not agree as to how it should be disposed of.2. The Rule was issued on the application of Indra Kumar Nath, an accused in a case pending before the Assistant Sessions Judge, Krishnagar, calling upon the District Magistrate of Nadia to show cause why the case should not be transferred from the Court of the Assistant Sessions Judge before whom it was pending to the District and Sessions Judge, Nadia or in the alternative why the proceedings pending against him should not be quashed or such other or further orders passed as the Court might think fit and proper.3. The petitioner was first tried by the same Assistant Sessions Judge with the aid of a jury on a charge under Section 304, Penal Code. In accordance with the unanimous verdict of the jury that he was not guilty under Section 304, Penal Code but was gu...
Yusuf Sk. and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Cal258
Mitter, J. 1. This appeal involves a point of law of great importance in the administration of criminal justice, and as we find ourselves in respectful disagreement with at least one decision of a Division Bench of this Court, that of Roxburgh and Blank, JJ. in -- 'Ashiruddin Ahmed v. The King' AIR 1949 Cal 182 (A), I feel it to be our duty to refer the question for the decision of a Full Bench to be constituted by the learned Chief Justice. My learned brother is, however, of the opinion that the said decision is not binding upon us and that the matter should accordingly rest here. I do not agree. Moreover, the point of law is of such importance that it deserves to be considered by a fuller Bench. This case must, therefore, be placed before the learned Chief Justice for such action as he may be minded to take.2. The point of law involved concerns the nature and extent of the burden which is placed upon an accused by Section 105, Evidence Act which is as follows :'When a person is accus...
Balai Chand Basak Vs. N. Roy Choudhury, Additional Refugee Rehabilitat ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Cal495
ORDERDeep Narayan Sinha, J. 1. This is a Rule calling upon the respondents to show cause why they should not forbear from giving effect to the order of dismissal dated 9-1-53, complained of in the petition, and/or why they should not rescind or withdraw the said order and/or why such other or further order or orders should not be made as to the Court seems fit and proper. 2. The facts of this case are shortly as follows: On 29-4-1950, the petitioner was appointed an Additional Rehabilitation Officer under the Relief and Rehabilitation Commissioner, West Bengal, with effect from the date he joined his duty. The appointment letter which is annexure 'A' to the petition, provides as follows: 'The appointment is purely on temporary basis and liable to be terminated without any notice.' 3. The petitioner was posted at Kalna in the district of Burdwan, and one of his duties was to disburse loans to refugees. It is alleged that in course of an inspection of the loan account it was discovered t...
Bengal Luxmi Cotton Mills Ltd. and ors. Vs. Mahaluxmi Cotton Mills Ltd ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-11-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal273,58CWN689
Chakravartti, C.J. 1. We have heard the learned Advocate-General for the appellants in this appeal at some length and having done so, we are of opinion that the proper course for us to adopt will be to adjourn the hearing of the appeal till after the decision of Suit No. 1225 of 1951, -- 'Premraj Dulichand v. Mahaltixmi Cotton Mills Ltd.', pending on the Original Side.2. The appeal has arisen in the following way. The four appellants, who are creditors of the respondent-company, applied for a winding-up order against it on the ground that 'the first instalment of their debts, which had already become payable under the provisions of a certain scheme, had not been paid in spite of notices of demand under Section 163, Indian Companies Act. The company's reply was that the debts claimed by the appellants were undoubtedly due to them, but this scheme provided that the debts were to be paid out of the profits and inasmuch as the company had not made sufficient profits since the date of the s...
Commr. of Excess Profits Tax, West Bengal Vs. Ruby General Insurance C ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-11-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Cal477,58CWN354,[1954]25ITR418(Cal)
Chakravartti, C.J. 1. This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court from a judgment and order of a Division Bench of this Court, dated 10-9-1953, rendered and made upon a reference under Section 21, Excess Profitst Tax Act, read with Section 66A(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act.2. The case has had a history. It appears that assessments of the respondent Insurance Company to Excess Profits Tax for three chargeable accounting periods, namely, those ending on 31-12-1939, 31-12-1940 and 31-12-1941, were taken up at one and the same time and in respect of all the three assessments, a common question of law was raised.That question was whether in computing the average amount of capital, the sums standing to the credit of the Fire Insurance Fund, Marine Insurance Fund, Motor and Accident Insurance Fund and Reserves for Exceptional Losses, could be properly deducted under Rule, 2 Schedule II, read with the explanatory sub-paragraph attached to the Rule in the Excess Profits Ta...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »