Kolkata Court February 1959 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.
Jivandas Khimji and anr. Vs. Rashid Allidina and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-1959
Reported in: AIR1959Cal532
K.C. Das Gupta, C.J. 1. These two appeals are against decree made by Mitter, J., in favour of the respondent, Rashid Allidina, who had brought a suit for a declaration that he is entitled to a right of easement of light and air through certain windows on his premises No. 17 Ezra Street; and for an injunction restraining the two defendants from interfering with the right of easement. The two defendants were the Trustees for the Improvement of Calcutta and Jivandas Khimji. Trustees for the Improvement of Calcutta have preferred the appeal which has been numbered 125 of 1955. The other appeal which is No. 124 of 1955 was by the other defendant. 16 Ezra Street which was acquired in accordance with the provisions of Section 16 of the Land Acquisition Act lies to the east and south of the plaintiff's premises. The real question in this case is the question of law which we have had to consider in the other appeal decided this day, namely Appeal No. 80 of 1954. That question is whether the omi...
New Central Jute Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Rivers Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. a ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-10-1959
Reported in: AIR1959Cal352
R.S. Bachawat, J.The point for determination in this appeal is whether a right to sue for damages for breach of contract appertaining to the business of the transferor company is transferred by a vesting order under Section 153A of the Indian Companies Act, 1913. On 6-9-51 Albion Jute Mills Co. Ltd., instituted a suit against the respondent claiming damages for breach of contract to carry certain bales of Jute safely. The plaint alleges that the defendant carrier returned the goods to the plaintiff in a damaged and deteriorated condition and that the plaintiff thereby suffered damages.2. On 6-12-1955, S. R. Das Gupta, J., sanctioned a scheme of amalgamation of Albion Jute Mills Co. Ltd., and Lothian Jute Mills Co. Ltd., with New Central Jute Mills Co. Ltd. The learned Judge also ordered that (a) the whole of the undertaking and property and all the assets and liabilities of Albion Jute Mills Co. Ltd., and Lothian Jute Mills Co. Ltd., as mentioned in the Scheme of Amalgamation be transf...
Cherry Hosiery Mills Ltd. Vs. S.K. Ghose and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-09-1959
Reported in: AIR1959Cal397,63CWN574
ORDERSinha, J.1. This is an application under the Bengal Smoke Nuisances Act (Act III of 1905). The preamble of the Act states that it is 'An Act to amend the law relating to the abatement of nuisances arising from the smoke of furnaces or fire places in the town and suburbs of Calcutta and in Howrah and to provide for the extension thereof to other areas in Bengal'.2. The facts in this case are briefly as follows: The petitioner is a Limited Company which has been carrying on the business of manufacturing Hosiery goods since 1952. For the said purpose, it has acquired approximately three bighas of land at premises No. 21 Srinath Mukherjee Lane, Dum Dum in the suburbs of Calcutta. In the said premises, the Company has constructed four ovens. It is stated in the petition that the ovens are each two feet in diameter and fifteen inches in height, and are intended to burn soft coke and charcoal in order to boil and clean hosiery fabrics. It is claimed that of these four ovens, only two are...
Bagchi (P.N.) and Co. (Private) Ltd. Vs. Judge, Second Industrial Trib ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-06-1959
Reported in: (1959)ILLJ605Cal
Prasanta Bihari Mukerji, J.1. This is an application by P.M. Bagchi & Co. (Private), Ltd., challenging the legality and validity of an industrial award made by the Second Industrial Tribunal of West Bengal on 24 April 1956, directing six employees of the petitioner company to be reinstated in service with back pay and allowances for the entire period from the date of their dismissal to the date of their reinstatement.2. Mr. De, learned Counsel for the petitioner, challenges this award on three basic grounds. His first ground is that the award is bad on the face of it. It is erroneous on the face of the record. In support of his argument, he points to the findings of the tribunal that the enquiry made by the company's enquiring officer was wrongly held by the tribunal to be against the rules of natural justice. Now, in this case, the fact is that the enquiry was held by the management. Notices were Issued on these six employees requesting them to be present at the enquiry. In spite of s...
Satya Ranjan Das Gupta Vs. Postmaster-general, West Bengal Circle, Cal ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-05-1959
Reported in: AIR1961Cal454
ORDERP.B. Mukharji, J. 1. This is an application by Satya Ranjan Das Gupta under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging his order of discharge from his service as a clerk in the post office. The order of discharge was made on the 9th January, 1953, in the following terms:- 'Sri Satya Ranjan Das Gupta, Temporaryclerk, Nadia Division and Offg. clerk, Purbasthali is discharged from service with immediate effect. He should be given one month's pay in lieu of onemonth's notice.' This order was signed by the Superintendent ofPost Offices, Nadia Division. 2. The petitioner challenges this order under Article 311 of the Constitution on the ground that he has been removed without a reasonable opportunity of showing cause against such removal. The defence is that the discharge in this case was not by way of punishment but under the terms and conditions of temporary service. On behalf of the Government, reliance is placed on Rule 3 of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 194...
Ram Ranjan Rakshit Vs. the Chief Administrator, Rehabilitation Finance ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-05-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Cal416,64CWN126
ORDERP.B. Mukharji, J.1.This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by Ram Ranjan Rakshit against the Chief Administrator, Rehabilitation Finance Administration, New Delhi, the Collector of Krishnagar, the Certificate Officer of Krishnagar and other respondents. The petitioner guaranteed a loan taken by one borrower, Nikhil Bhusan Ghose, from the Rehabilitation Finance Administration. This was done under the provisions of the Rehabilitation Finance Administration Act, 1948, which was a statute, passed for giving financial assistance on reasonable terms to displaced persons to enable them to settle in business and industry. The petitioner guaranteed this loan. The borrower failed to repay the loan whereupon the Chief Administrator, under the Rehabilitation Finance Administration Act, proceeded to realise it from the petitioner under Certificate proceedings. In the course of the Certificate proceedings, the petitioner objected and filed his objections before the Certificate ...
Sew Kumher Vs. Mongru (Mongri) Kumharin
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-04-1959
Reported in: AIR1959Cal454,1959CriLJ834,63CWN341
ORDERS.K. Sen, J.1. This Rule was issued against an order of Sri A.C. Sarbajna, Magistrate, 1st Class, Sealdah for setting aside the order under Section 488 Cr. P. C. passed by him on the petitioner to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs. 50/- per month for his wife and children. The opposite party Monghri Kumharin was married to the petitioner Sew Kumher about 15 or 16 years ago and there was about five children of marriage of whom three are surviving. They are young children who were aged 7, 5 and 2 years, respectively, when the application under Section 488 Cr. P. C. was filed in December 1957. The opposite party's case was that the petitioner became unduly intimate with a woman named Lachhia and began to ill-treat her and thereafter she went away to her native village together with the three surviving children; and when she came back about 4 months before she filed an application under Section 488 Cr. P. C., she found that the husband, the petitioner, had married the woman Lachhia an...
State of West Bengal Vs. Kesson Chand Kocher and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-03-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Cal506,64CWN514
Lahiri, J. 1. The decision of these four appeals turns on a single question and that is whether the State of West Bengal is bound by four compromise decrees passed by the Supreme Court on the 2nd March, 1954, although it was not a party to any of them. The facts upon which this question arises are not in dispute and are as follows: 2. On divers dates in the years 1938 and 1939, certain plots of land together with structures and trees standing thereon were acquired by the Land Acquisition Collector for the Calcutta Improvement Trust. Four land acquisition cases were started for the acquisition of these four plots of land. There were two grounds of rival claimants for compensation: (a) the landlords who may be collectively described as the Kochers and (b) the tenants who may be collectively described as the Mitras. In respect of the lands which formed the subject-matter of the acquisition the Collector made joint awards in favour of the landlords and tenants. Against the awards of the Co...
Naib Transport (Private) Ltd. Vs. S.N. Mukherjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-02-1959
Reported in: AIR1959Cal447
K.C. Das Gupta, C.J. 1. The appellant company owned two buses which in the year 1954 were plying for hire on Route No. 33 in Calcutta on the strength of a permit granted by the Regional Transport Authority in accordance with the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act. In that year the State Transport Directorate started putting their own buses on Route No. 33 and in an attempt to induce the owners of buses, who had already valid licence for operation on that route, agreed that if any such owners would withdraw their buses from Route No. 33, they could go over to Route No. 12C from which the State Transport Directorate would withdraw their buses. Some owners of buses operating on Route No. 33 accepted the offer and transferred their operations to 'Route No. 12C. This appellant, however, refused to transfer its buses to Route No. 12C. Its position was that the permits for its two buses were valid till 9-11-1956, and it preferred to continue its operation on Route No. 33 on the strength of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›