Kolkata Court June 1956 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.
Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs to State of West Beng ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-06-1956
Reported in: AIR1960Cal170,63CWN820
Mitter, J. 1. This is an appeal by the State against the respondent's acquittal of a charge under Section 451 (1) (a) read with Section 537 of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1951. The charge was for keeping open a private market without a license granted by the Commissioner in that behalf for 1953-54.2. The respondents as sebai's of a deity were, at all material times, as they still are, in occupation of premises No. 26, Indra Biswas Road, in ward No. 30, within district Cossipore of the Corporation of Calcutta. A private market without a license having been found to exist at the said premises, the respondents were prosecuted under Section 451 (1) (a) read with Section 537 of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1951.3. The respondents' defence was twofold: firstly, that they were not the owners of the market and, secondly, that the market concerned not having been declared and licensed by the Corporation as a market was not a 'market' within the meaning of Clause (42) of Section 5 of the Act and ...
United Printing and Binding Works Ltd. Vs. Kishori Lal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-05-1956
Reported in: AIR1956Cal593
ORDERP.B. Mukharji, J. 1. This is an application by United Printing & Binding Works Ltd., a private limited Company, to set aside an Award made by two Arbitrators Bimal Chatterjee and Kishanlal Mohta being respectively the nominees of the petitioner and the respondent Kishori Lal Saraogi. By Clause 15 of an Agreement dated 30-3-1954 the petitioner and the respondent agreed to the following arbitration clause:-- 'All disputes and difference arising out of matters relating to the Agreement shall be decided by Arbitration under the Indian Arbitration Act by reference to a single Arbitrator if the parties to these presents so agree upon and in default two arbitrators one to be nominated by either of the parties and to be appointed.' The applicant's arbitrator Bimal Chatterjee was appointed on 17-10-1955 and the respondent's Arbitrator Kishanlal Mohta was appointed on 21-10-1955, Various statements and counter-statements were filed before the Arbitrators by the parties, The Arbitrators agre...
Kumar Purnendu Nath Tagore Vs. Kalipada Dutt and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-04-1956
Reported in: AIR1956Cal513,1956CriLJ1196
Das Gupta, J.1. On the complaint of the present petitioner Kumar Purnendu Nath Tagore the Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta, issued processes against one Saliendra Kumar Chakraborty for an offence under Section 500, I. P. C. and against some other persons for an offence under Section 500/ 109, I. P. C. The case was transferred to Mr. M. C. Sarbadhikary, Presidency Magistrate, for trial but after some witnesses had been examined by him he went away on transfer.. His successor directed a fresh trial. Lady Ranu Mookerjee of No. 7 - Harrington Street who , it is said, is the President of the National Academy of Pine Arts, was summoned to appeal as a witness for the complainant on 28-11-1955. On that date she filed an application praying that as her heart was very weak, she would not be able to attend the Magistrate's court which was on the first floor and she might be examined on commission. The Magistrate refused the prayer but ordered that he would examine her on the 6th o...
Naresh Chandra Bose Vs. Sachindra Nath Deb and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-01-1956
Reported in: AIR1961Cal527
Chakravartti, C.J.1. This application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court is on the face of it, not maintain-able. It purports to be an application under Article 132(1) of the Constitution of India and the learned Advocate, who appears in support of the application, states that it is in fact an application under that Article. The scheme under Article 132 and Articles 133 and 134 as regards appeals to the Supreme Court is different. Under Article 132(1), it is the Judges who deal with the case in the High Court who have to certify whether the case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution. That however is not the final certificate for leave to appeal. With the expression of opinion contemplated by Article 132(1), if the Judges do express such an opinion, the intending appellant has to make an application under Article 133 and then the Bench, dealing with applications for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, examines the application and see...
Subodh Ranjan Ghosh Vs. Major N.A.O. Callaghan and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-01-1956
Reported in: AIR1956Cal532,60CWN917,(1957)ILLJ69Cal,(1957)ILLJ69Cal
ORDERSinha, J.1. The facts in this case are shortly as follows : The petitioner was an employee in the Military Engineering Service known as M, E. S. In 1940 he joined service as a qualified overseer & subsequently rose to the position of Superintendent of the first grade. It appears that he was appointed by the G. E. Ishapore & subsequently on 21-8-1941 Articles of Agreement were drawn up signed both fay the G. E. Ishapore as also by the petitioner. The Articles of. Agreement recited the prior appointment and then proceeded to enumerate the terms and conditions of service. It is in a form known as Form 'IAPZ 2055'. It is headed as'Form of agreement to be executed by permanent and temporary clerks, etc. -- applicable to accountants, clerks, cashiers, copyists, agents, storekeepers and all other civilian employees and to be pasted in the service books upon execution.'The Articles o'f Agreement contained the following clause:'5. If the Government or the appointing officer shall at any ti...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›