Kolkata Court March 1958 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.
Aluminium Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commis ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-31-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Cal570,(1959)ILLJ249Cal
ORDERP.B. Mukharji, J.1. This is an application by the Aluminium Corporation of India Ltd. under Article 226 of the Constitution. The company complains against an order of the Government, dated 23rd October, 1957 No. R-1237/WB/6983 addressed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner at 28, Theatre Road, Calcutta to the Manager of the Aluminium Corporation of India Ltd. This order is purported to be made under Section 19-A of the Employees Provident Funds Act, 1952.2. The material part of that order of the Government of India reads as follows :'It has been decided by the Government of India under Section 19-A of the Employees' Provident Funds Act, 1952 that your factory will come under the purview of the Employees' Provident Funds Act, 1952 and the Scheme framed thereunder with effect from 1st November, 1952. You are requested to comply with all the provisions of the said Scheme with effect from that date.As regards payment of contributions for the pre-discovery period (i.e. from 1st ...
Ghosh Singh Partners Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-28-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal287
P. Chakravartti, C.J. 1. The only question involved in this appeal is whether between the appellant company and the Union of India, there is a binding arbitration agreement. Sarkar, J., has held that there is none. He was invited by the appellant to make appropriate orders with regard to an agreement set up by it, but he declined to do so in the view that the agreement, being contained in a contract which did not accord with Section 175(3) of the Government of India Act 1935, could not bind the Union of India. The appellant questions that finding and contends that, although the contract containing the agreement was not executed in accordance with the provisions of Section 175(3), those provisions are only directory and the contract accordingly was not void. 2. Since the only question canvassed before us was a pure question of law, it is not necessary to state the facts in detail. It will be sufficient to say that the appellant company entered into a contract with the General Manager of...
Mira Chatterjee Vs. Public Service Commission and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-28-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Cal345,62CWN429
ORDERP.B. Mukherji, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioner is a school teacher. She is a Master of Arts, or the University of Calcutta. She joined the Binapani Girls' High School as an Assistant Teacher on 21-1-1947. She was appointed to that post by the Managing Committee of the School. The School is not a Government school but a government aided school.2. She first served a probationary period of six months and then was confirmed as an Assistant Teacher in that school with effect from 1-10-1947. She then passed the Bachelor of Training Examination in 1955 and took the B. T. degree. When she joined the school, the school was governed by a School Code. Since 1950 the West Bengal Secondary Education Act came into force and the administration, control and supervision of the high schools vested in the Board of Secondary Education of the State.3. By the regulations flamed under the West Bengal Secondary Education Act, 1950 appointment of persons a...
Dass Bank Ltd. Vs. Smt. Kali Kumari Debi and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-27-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Cal530,62CWN493
P.N. Mookerjee, J. 1. This is the plaintiff's appeal and it arises out of a suit for recovery of money to the extent of Rs. 19,999. The suit has been decreed in part by the court below, namely, for Rs. 8,113-5-9 pies and the plaintiff's appeal is directed against the refusal of its claim with regard to the balance, namely, Rs. 11,885-10-3 pies.2. The suit arose under the following circumstances ;The defendant No. 1, who is the husband of defendant No. 2, had an overdraft current account with the plaintiff Bank and was in the habit of faking loans under that account. Defendant No. 2, the wife, appears to have executed a surety bond (Ext. 1), guaranteeing repayment of the dues of defendant No. 1 to the plaintiff Bank in the above account to the extent of Rs. 20,000 and hypothecating for that purpose the properties, described in Annexure 'A' of the present plaint. The plaintiff Bank brought the present suit on the allegation inter alia that the defendant No. 1 was its debtor under the abo...
Kori and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-26-1958
Reported in: AIR1960Cal509,1960CriLJ1075
Mitter, J. 1. Appellant Kori alias Kora Ghuniya was tried upon a charge of murder and appellant Upendra Nath Mandal was tried upon a charge of abetment of murder by the learned Sessions Judge of Purulia without the aid of a Jury. The learned Judge found each appellant guilty of the relative offence and sentenced each to life imprisonment. 2. The prosecution case against the appellantswas briefly as follows : 3. The deceased Aswini Kumar Banerjee was a resident of Ramkanali. At the material time he was employed as a postman attached to Neturia Sub-Post Office. At about 8 a.m. on 19-10-1956, Aswini left home on a bicycle to report himself for duty at the sub-post office. He carried with him some postal articles, including certain undelivered registered letters, money orders forms and bearing letters. He proceeded along the Barakar-Purulia Road and when he came near mile post No. 10 he found the two appellants hiding themselves near a culvert not far off. As there was enmity between him a...
Moral Majhi Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-26-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Cal616,1958CriLJ1390
S.N. Guha Ray, J.1. The appellant Moral Majhi along with 17 thers was put on his trial on different charges. Moral Majhi and Gurai Majhi were charged under Section 304/34, I. P. C., and the rest were charged under Section 304/149. I.P C., for having killed Budhu Majhi, Moral Majhi was charged under Section 326, I. P. C., for having caused grievous hurt to the cheek of Thatu Majhi with a cutting weapon, viz., a tabla. Gurai Majhi was also charged with having caused such a hurt to Thatu Majhi with a cutting instrument. All the accused were further charged under Section 147, I. P. C. The jury by 5 : 2 found the appellant Moral Majhi guilty only under Section 326, I. P. C., for having caused grievous hurt to Thatu Majhi with a cutting instrument and they unanimously found all the accused not guilty on the other counts. The learned Judge accepted the majority verdict as against Moral Majhi, convicted him under Section 326, I. P. C., and sentenced him to four years' rigorous imprisonment. He...
Amulya Kumar Sikdar Vs. L.M. Bakshi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-24-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Cal470,62CWN690
ORDERD.N. Sinha, J.1. The facts in this case are shortly as follows: In or about March, 1949, the petitioner was appointed as a State Transport driver under the Directorate of Transportation, State of West Bengal, having been appointed by Mr. H. D. Choudhury, Special Officer, Home (Transport) Department. On or about 22-1-1954 the petitioner was plying State bus No. WBS 938. White so driving, there was an accident at the junction of Harrison Road and Strand Road. There was a collision between the bus and a lorry and the State bus suffered certain damages. On the same day a first information report was lodged at the Burrabazar Police Station and the petitioner gave an explanation. According to him, the explanation was not properly recorded. On 16-2-1954 an order of suspension was passed against the petitioner. On 17-2-1954 a charge-sheet was framed which was served on the petitioner on 19-2-1954. The gravamen of the charge was that there was an accident following which the State bus, whi...
Jahed Shaikh and anr. Vs. Kamalesh Chandra Das and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-19-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal165,62CWN377
B.N. Banerjee, J. 1. These two appeals involve the same question of law and are dealt with together. 2. One Radhakanta Das, now deceased, was, at all material times, a stockholder of and a dealer in corrugated iron sheets. 3. In Second Appeal No. 891 of 1953 (arising out of money suit No. 84 of 1950), the plaintiff appellant, Jahed Sheikh, paid to the said Radhakanta Das (who was original defendant No. 1), in his said business, a sum of, Rs. 500/- as advance towards the price of ten bundles of corrugated iron sheets agreed to be sold by the latter to the former. The advance was paid on the 8th November, 1947, and is evidenced by a receipt, marked exhibit 1. 4. Defendants respondents Nos. 2 to 4 are said to be agents of Radhakanta Das, in the said business. The receipt, exhibit 1, was signed by defendant No.2, Kamalesh, on behalf of defendant No. 1 Radhakanta. Defendants respondents Nos. 1(1) to 1(7) are heirs and legal representatives of the original defendant No. 1 Radhakanta, who wer...
Naib Transport (Private) Ltd. Vs. S.N. Mukherji and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-19-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Cal652,62CWN414
ORDERP.B. Mukharji, J.1. This is an application by Messrs Naib Transport (Private) Ltd., under Article 226 of the Constitution directed against the Regional Transport Authority. The application seeks for a writ of certiorari to quash the orders dated the 24th/26th December, 1956 passed by the Regional Transport Authority. Calcutta Region. By that order the Regional Transport Authority refused to grant two stage carriage permits in favour of Messrs. Naib Transport (Private) Ltd. authorising them to ply their two buses Nos. WBS-781 and WBS-759 on route 12C of Calcutta. There was an appeal before the Appellate Sub-Committee of the State Transport Authority, West Bengal. The Appellate Sub-Committee also rejected the appeal of the applicant. The present application is directed against that order.2. The two points, of objection that have been urged before me by Dr. Atul Chandra Gupta on behalf of the applicant may be broadly stated. His first objection is that the Regional Transport Authorit...
Administrator General of West Bengal Vs. Basudeb Mukherjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-18-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal174
K.C. Das Gupta, J.1. These two Rules were issued under an order of the Chief Justice on 11-3-1958. By one Rule Barindra Kumar Ghose was directed to attend before this Court in person on this day 18-3-1958 and to show cause either in person or by Advocate why he should not be committed or otherwise dealt with for contempt of this Court committed by addressing and causing to be delivered to the Chief Justice at his private residence a letter dated 8-3-1958 and thereby attempting to interfere with the course of justice in Suit No. 1947 of 1950, Administrator General of West Bengal v. Basudeb Mukherji pending in the Court of Mitter, J. By the other Rule Sambhu Nath Mukherji of 22 Park Lane, Calcutta was directed to appear before this Court in person on this day 18-3-1958 and show cause either in person or by Advocate why he should not be committed or otherwise dealt with for aiding and abetting Sri Barindra Kumar Ghose, Editor, Daily Basumati, in committing contempt of this Court by carryi...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »