Kolkata Court December 1954 Judgments
Chhatumull Chowthmull Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-23-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal264,59CWN504
K.C. Das Gupta, J.1. The petitioner brought this suit for recovery of damages for the loss of 10 maunds 16 seers of jute. His case is that on 23-8-1951, the delivered 125 bales of four maunds of jute per bale to the Station Master, Gaibandha, on a railway in Eastern Pakistan, for carriage to Cossipore Road Station on the Eastern Railway in the Union of India and that when the consignment, after being unloaded from the railway wagon at Cossipore Road was lying in the goods shed under the care of the Eastern Railway, it got soaked in rain on account of the negligence of the Eastern Railway and resulted in the loss of 10 maunds 16 seers. The defendant denied negligence but also pleaded that there was no contract between the plaintiff and the defendant and further that as the consignee had not taken delivery of the consignment within a reasonable time, the Railway was not liable. There was also a plea of want of notice under Section 77, Railways Act, and Section 80, Civil P. C.2. The trial...
Tag this Judgment!Haradhone Haldar Vs. Usha Charan Karmakar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-22-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal292
P.N. Mukerjee, J. 1. This appeal is directed against a concurrent decree of the two courts below, allowing the plaintiff-respondent's alternative claim for pre-emption under Section 4, Partition Act. 2. The suit properties (C. S. plot No Section 113, 114 and 116) which constitute the undivided family dwelling house of the plaintiff and his brother Kangsari Mohan Karmakar, the predecessor of respondents Nos. 2 and 3, belonged to them in equal moiety shares. In 1930, the present defendant-appellant (who was a stranger to the family) auction-purchased Kangsari's . half share of the suit properties. He got symbolical possession sometime in April, 1930, but he failed to get actual possession. Thereupon, he brought a suit (Title Suit No. 55 of 1931) against Kangsari and the present plaintiff for 'inter alia' joint possession of the suit properties along with the present plaintiff and, having recovered an 'ex parte' decree on 30-11-1931, he took joint possession by removing the huts of Kangsa...
Tag this Judgment!Jagadindra Nath Chowdhury and anr. Vs. Ulangini Dasi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-22-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal312
P.N. Mookerjee, J.1. This appeal raises an important question of Hindu law.2. The plaintiff who claims tote a permanent lessee from a Hindu lady brought this suit for a permanent injunction to restrain the defendants who are father and son from interfering with her possession of the disputed tank. The defendant No 1 claims to be a part transferee of the suit tank from the reversioners after the female owner's death and his son defendant No. 2 appears to have acted for his father. If, therefore, the suit succeeds against defendant No. 1, it will succeed against both the defendants; if it fails against him, it will fail against defendant No. 2 also.3. In the plaint, there was no sepcific allegation that the plaintiff's lease was justified by 'legal necessity' or on the doctrine of 'benefit of estate', as applying to alienations by limited owners in Hindu Law, or on the theory of any 'bona fide enquiry' on the plaintiff lessee's part as to the existence of such justifying causes.4. The de...
Tag this Judgment!Bishnu Bijoy Srimani Vs. Chandra Bijoy Srimany and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-21-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal281
Chakravartti, C.J. 1. A preliminary objection has been taken in this appeal that, by reason of the death of one of the respondents and the failure of the appellant to bring his representatives on the record, the whole appeal has abated. Much as I regret the result, the objection, in my view, must be given effect to. 2. The facts are simple. It appears that there was a reference to arbitration in a partition suit and an award was made to the effect that a sum of Rs. 32,000./-, of which the appellant had had use and enjoyment, would be paid by him to four persons, each being paid a sum of Rs. 8,000/- and that each of the said four persons would have a charge upon a one-fourth share of that portion of premises No. 115/9, Cornwallis Street which was going to be allotted to the appellant. A decree in terms of that award followed. Thereupon the four persons, to whom I have just referred, adopted a somewhat unusual procedure of combining, in a single application and asking for an order for th...
Tag this Judgment!Ganpatrai and Sons Vs. Ramgopal Nanda Kishore
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-20-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal302,59CWN807
Bachawat, J.1. This is an application for extension of the time of, the arbitrators to reconsider their award.2. On 29,12-1952, the petitioner referred its claim for damages to the arbitration of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce and Industries under the arbitration clause contained in the contract dated 15-12-1952. On 27-6-1953, the Bengal Chamber of Commerce made its award No. 680 of 1953 in favour of the petitioner.3. By consent order dated 15-4-1954 this Courtremitted the award to the Bengal Chamber forreconsideration in accordance with the rules of itsTribunal of Arbitration and the Chamber was directed to submit its decision within 3 months from15-4-1954. Subsequently correspondence passedbetween the Registrar of the Chamber and theattomies of the parties with regard to the questionwhether the reconsideration of the award should beby the arbitral court which made the award or bya new arbitral court to be appointed by the Registrar of the Chamber. By letter dated 23-6-1954the Chamber...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Frank Morton Fisk
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-20-1954
Reported in: AIR1956Cal656,60CWN61
ORDERBachawat, J.1. On 29-6-1953 the respondent Hugh Osbert Sheane Smith obtained a decree in the Small Cause Court Suit No. 1150 of 1953 against Frank Morton Fisk.2. On 12-1-1954 the Court of Small Causes issued a prohibitory order under Order 21, Rule 48, C. P. O. directing the Accountant General, West Bengal, to withhold Rs. 655/9/6 from the salary of the judgment-debtor.3. Shortly thereafter the judgment-debtor paid a sum of Rs. 250/- to the judgment-creditor and only a sum of Rs. 405/9/6 remained dne to the judgment-creditor.4. On 22-4-1954 the Accountant-General, West Bengal, sent to the Court of Small Causes a cheque No. 138857 dated 1-4-1954, for a sum of Rs. 550/-which had been withheld from the salary of the judgment-debtor.5. On 3-4-1954 the Court returned the cheque to the Accountant-General, West Bengal, for correction. Tne Court did not accept the cneque in view of the fact that only Rs. 405/9/6 was then due to the judgment-creditor.6. On 5-4-1954 the judgment-debtor was ...
Tag this Judgment!Moorhouse (inspector of Taxes) Vs. Dooland.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-18-1954
Reported in: [1955]28ITR86(Cal)
EVERSHED M. R. In this appeal the question is whether the Crown are entitled to recover income-tax in respect of a sum (not finally ascertained, but treated for the purposes of the proceedings as amounting to pounds 48 or thereabouts) which represents the proceeds of collections made at cricket matches during the cricket season of 1951 for his own benefit by or on behalf of Mr. Bruce Dooland, a professional cricket employed as such at the relevant dates by the East Lancashire Cricket Club, one of the clubs commonly known as 'the Lancashire League.'Mr. Dooland was at the relevant dates assessed for tax and, as is agreed, rightly assessed - under Schedule E of the Income Tax Act 1918, his service as cricket professional being an 'employment' which, as the result of section 18 of the Finance Act, 1922, was translated from the scope of Schedule D to the of Schedule E. It follows that Mr. Doolands liability has to be tested having regard to the well-known language of rule 1 of Schedule E '....
Tag this Judgment!Munna Lal Tewary Vs. Harold R. Scott and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-17-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal451,59CWN260,(1956)IILLJ474Cal
Chakravahtti, C.J.1. The only ground urged in this appeal was that the appellant's discharge from the service of the State Government was bad, inasmuch as neither before the initiation of departmental proceedings against him, nor before the imposition of a penalty had the Public Service Commission been consulted.2. At all material times the appellant, Munnalal Tewary, was employed as the Head Accountant under the Directorate of the West Bengal Fire Services. In March, 1949, he was placed under -suspension on receipt of a report from the Anti-corruption Department of certain malpractices. Thereafter, an enquiry was started against him in respect of two charges, one concerning the alleged purchase of a motorcar said to have been improperly made and another concerning alleged falsification of a Petrol Receipt and Issue Register in order to conceal misappropriation of petrol.An enquiry was held by Sri S. K. Gupta, who was then the Secretary to the Government in the Department of Local Self...
Tag this Judgment!Kumudnath Dutta Vs. Banga Luxmi Hosiery Mills Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-14-1954
Reported in: AIR1956Cal184,59CWN1093
ORDERP.N. Mookerjee, J. 1. This rule arises out of a proceeding under Sub-section (9) of Section 19, Rent Control Act of 1950, Under that sub-section, the landlord is entitled to 'complain to the Controller that the statements in the tenant's application of the reasons and circumstances which fed him to deposit the rent are untrue'.The petitioner-landlord's application under the said sub-section has been thrown out by the Rent Controller on the preliminary ground that the two conditions which are pre-requisite for the maintainability of the application, as prescribed in the said Sub-section (9), have not been complied with in the present case. The Rent Controller's decision has been affirmed on appeal by the learned Appellate Judge.2. In my opinion, the decision, complained of, is correct and ought to be affirmed. There is no dispute as to the facts. The notice of deposit was received by the landlord-petitioner on 7-2-1953, The complaint under Sub-section (9) was filed on 5-3-1953. Thi...
Tag this Judgment!Bijoy Kumar Basu Vs. Kalipada Ghosh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-14-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal590
Sen J. 1. This revisional applicator is directed against the order of Sri A.N. Lahiri, Additional Sessions Judge, Burdwan, acquitting the eight accused opposite parties of charges under Sections 304/34, 304/109 and 323 I. P. C. on the unanimous verdict of the jury finding them not guilty.2. The prosecution case was briefly as follows: Rakhal Ghosh of Bhaturia, Purbasthali Police Station, sold eight bamboos from a bamboo clump in his village to Ranjit Ghosh of Bandhupur, on 28-3-1953. The bamboo clump in question belonged to Khenta Dasi, widow of Ramkrishna Ghosh, nephew of Rakhal Ghosh living in the same homestead as Rakhal Ghosh. The bamboo clump was situated just to the west of a plot of waste land of the homestead of accused Dharma Ghosh alias Sital, the plot of waste, land also belonging to accused Dharma Ghosh.The bamboo clump was pointed out to Ranjit Ghosh by Rakhal Ghosh about 11-30 a. m. or 12 noon and Ranjit cut eight bamboos from the clump. Leaving the bamboos there, Ranjit ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »