Kolkata Court January 1955 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.
R.E. Ramsay Vs. Pasupatinath Malia and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-1955
Reported in: AIR1955Cal255
K.C. Das Gupta J.1. The respondents obtained a consent decree-against the appellant in the following terms:'It is ordered and decreed that the suit is finally decreed on admission. Let there be a decree for Rs. 1,45,722-1-9 pies. Plaintiffs do further get a decree for khas possession of the property in suit as prayed for with costs. Subsequent interest do run on the decretal dues at 6 per cent, per annum. Schedule 'B' property do remain in charge for Rs. 1,45,722-1-9 pies and that the sura of Rs. 3630-15-9 pies be paid by the defendant to the plaintiffs on account of costs of this suit with interest at six per cent, per annum from this date upto date of realisation.'2. In execution of the decree the respondents realised Rs. 25,000/- by sale of the Schedule B property. Thereafter, the present execution case was started by them for recovery of the balance of Rs. 1,39,028-11-6 pies and their prayer is for realisation of the amount by sale after notice to the judgment-debtor and other part...
Tarachand Ghanshyamdas Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-1955
Reported in: AIR1955Cal258,59CWN550
Chakravartti, C.J. The question involved in this appeal has been described by the learned trial Judge as a very important question. It is not important in the sense of being a difficult or a serious question, but it has become important, because certain assumptions have come to be attached to it which have caused this Court, in certain instances, to exercise a power where neither the power, nor any occasion for its exercise really existed. The answer to the question, however, appears to be plain. We were able to reach that answer without much difficulty, because the learned Senior Standing Counsel, who appeared for the appellant, made no serious attempt to argue the unarguable. 2. The facts are simple. The appellants, Messrs. Tarachand Ghanshyamdas, brought a suit in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Berhampore, against Sree Radhakrishna Sugar Mills Ltd., (In Liquidation), and certain other parties for the enforcement of a charge, alleged to have been created by a certain Debenture o...
Loya Majhi and ors. Vs. Nir Dutta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-1955
Reported in: AIR1955Cal415
Renupada Mukherjee, J. 1. The facts involved in this appeal lie within a very narrow compass and there is no dispute about them. They may be briefly stated here : Loya Majhi, appellant 1 and deceased Bikran, predecessor-in-interest of appellants 2 and 3 of this appeal executed a sale deed in favour of one Bhola Nath Dutt, deceased predecessor of the respondents of this appeal on 19-10-1943, for a consideration of Rs. 250/-. An application forrestoration of the land, under the provisions of the Bengal Alienation of Agricultural Land (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1944 was filed before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Jhargram on 22nd February 1945by the vendors. The application purports to have been allowed on compromise on 3-5-1945 and the sale was converted into a complete usufructuary mortgage terminating on the last date of Chaitra, 1353 B.S. The transferee who was then alive moved the District Judge of Midnapore in revision under the proviso to Section 10 of the above Act for settingaside ...
Amarendra Nath Roy Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-11-1955
Reported in: AIR1955Cal236,1955CriLJ784
Guha Ray, J.1. The appellant Amarendra Nath Roy was convicted under s. 409, I. P. C. by a Special Judge, West Bengal First Special Court, Alipore, and sentenced to R.I. for one year and a fine of Rs. 1000/-and in default to R. I. for three months more.2. The State Transport Department of the Government of West Bengal has an office at P.11 Mission Row Extension. It has also another office known as the Lake Depot and started on 1-4-1950. From the very inception of the Lake Depot the present appellant was working as the Depot Cashier there. Prior to that he was working as Depot Cashier at the Mission Row Office. The case for the prosecution briefly is that all collections of the Lake Depot are sent by the Head Depot Cashier, Suhrid Kumar Bose, p. w. 1, through some of his Depot Cashiers in an armed van of the Transport Department from the Lake Depot for depositing in the iron safe meant exclusively for the cash from the Lake Depot and that the present appellant Amarendra who though attach...
Mrityunjoy Chatterjee and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-11-1955
Reported in: AIR1955Cal439,1955CriLJ1171,59CWN470
ORDERP.N. Mookerjee, J.1. This Rule and the connected Reference case arise out of the same criminal proceeding started against five accused persons, three of whom figure in the Rule, and one in the Reference case, the remaining accused having been acquitted by the learned trying Magistrate. 2. The offence alleged was under Section 188, Penal Code and, at the initial trial, four of the accused were convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 25/- each, or in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three weeks and one was acquitted under Section 245, Criminal P. C. 3. There was a motion to the learned SessionsJudge by the four convicted persons under Sections 435and 436, Criminal P. C. for reference to this Court.But the learned Additional Sessions Judge whofinally heard the application has made a Referenceonly in the case of one of the accused, Pulin Mondal,recommending a fresh trial in his case. This hasgiven rise to the above Reference. The learnedAdditional Sessions Judge has r...
Surya Kumar Manji and ors. Vs. Trilochan Nath and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-11-1955
Reported in: AIR1955Cal495,59CWN526
K.C. Das Gupta, J.1. This appeal is against the decision of our learned brother Renupada Mukherjee, J. allowing an appeal directed against an appellate decree. The respondents before us brought a suit for ejectment of the present appellants on the allegation that the defendant Kalipada Mullik was a tenant of a tank described in the schedule, his right being thika non-permanent' and the tenancy being for rearing and catching fishes.It was averred that the tenancy was terminated by a proper notice to quit, but the appellants had not given up possession. There were several defences raised; but the only defence with which we are at present concerned is that the notice served was not valid or sufficient in law. The trial Court held that the tenancy was one from year to year and could be terminated by six months' notice and so the notice was insufficient.It held, in the alternative, that even if the tenancy was regarded to be a monthly tenancy requiring fifteen days' notice, there was no val...
Kshirode Chandra Pal Vs. District Magistrate, Howrah and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-10-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Cal96,59CWN373
ORDERSinha, J.1. The petitioner is a resident of Pansila, P. S. Shyampur in the district of How-rah. He was a holder of fire-arm license No. 1167 in respect of a 12 bore DBBL gun No. 5383. This gun was sold by him to Sri Pan-chanan Adhikary, another license holder in the town of Tamluk on 15-1-1953. On 16-1-1953, he appears to have informed the District Magistrate of this fact and forwarded a copy of the letter to the Officer-in-charge of Shyampore Police station. On 26-1-1953, he received a notice or a communication from the Sub-Inspector of Police, Shyampore Police station, set out in para 5 of the petition.It appears from this document, which is described as a notice that it is recorded that the fire-arm license of the petitioner had been seized, having been cancelled under the How-rah District Magistrate's office Memo No. 1697-C dated the 24-12-1952 and S. P./D.I.B. office Memo No. 3 (2)/34-48 (2) 419 dated 30-12-1952. On 2-2-1953, the petitioner wrote a letter to the District Magi...
Ram Prasad Shaw and anr. Vs. Chief Secretary to the Govt. of West Beng ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-07-1955
Reported in: AIR1955Cal374,1955CriLJ1055
Mitter, J.1. This is a petition for the issue of a writ in the nature of 'habeas corpus' in respect of the detention of one Sanat Hazra. It is contended on the detenu's behalf that his detention was and is illegal, on the ground that the order under Section 11 of the relative Preventive Detention Act was for a period beyond the life of the Act. This is the only point urged.2. The following facts appear to be undisputed: The initial order of detention was made by the District Magistrate concerned on 7-8-1954. This order was in exercise of powers conferred by Section 3(2), Preventive Detention Act, 1950 (4 of 1950) as amended by the Preventive Detention (Second Amendment) Act, 1952 (61 of 1952). On the same day, there was a further order by the District Magistrate directing that the detenu be detained in the Dura Dum Central Jail. The letter addressed to the detenu setting out the grounds for his detention was also dated 7-8-1954, but it was not served upon the detenu until 18-8-1954. By...
Debendra Nath Sen Vs. Rajendra Chandra Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-06-1955
Reported in: AIR1955Cal498,1955CriLJ1257,59CWN516
S.R. Das Gupta, J. 1. This is a petition for quashing the proceedings pending against the petitioners in the court of Sri S.B. Sarkar, Magistrate First Class, Alipore, 24-Parganas.2. The case made in the petition of complaint upon which the said proceedings have been started is as follows : The petitioner is a Kabiraj and was in charge of Asansol Branch of the opposite party, Dacca Ayurvedic Pharmacy Limited. It was the duty of the petitioner to enter the medicines received by him in the cash book and the stock book and he was to remit the sale proceeds and render weekly, monthly and periodical accounts, to the Head Office. From the cash book it has been found that the accused misappropriated Rs. 527-7-6 in the first week of January 1954 and has also misappropriated over Rs. 1742/- by introducing spurious medicines namely 'Makaradhwaj and Swarnasindur' and 'Rasasindur' in the stock of the company.Upon those allegations the present proceedings have been started against the petitioner.3....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›