Kolkata Court August 1960 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.
Balendra Deb Roy and ors. Vs. Manabendra Deb Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-31-1960
Reported in: 1961CriLJ466
Niyogi, J.1. This Revision petition is against an order of a learned magistrate, first class, Chinsurah, passed in a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,2. It appears that the first-party, opposite party, Sri Manabendu Deeb Roy filed a petition under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, before the Sub-divisional magistrate Chinsurah on 11-4-59 praying that the petitioners second-parties might be directed to abstain from using criminal force and violence against the first party - in holding the Seba Puja of the deity Sri Sri Hangseswari Thakurani and other deities at Bansberia, P. S. Mogra, from 1st of Baisakh 1366 B. S. till the last day of Sravan, 1366 B.S. The learned Sub-divisional Magistrate then asked the officer-in-charge of the Mogra Police station to inquire and report. The Police duly submitted a report and on 29-4-59, on a consideration of the same, the learned magistrate was satisfied about the existence of an apprehension of breach of th...
Mahal Chand Sethia Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-30-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Cal123,1961CriLJ249,65CWN433
S.K. Sen, J.1. This Revisional application is directed against an order by the Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta, permitting the Investigating Officer to take finger impressions of the petitioner Mahal Chand Sethia for the purpose of investigation of a case under Ss. 120B/420/466 and 467 of the Indian Penal Code, pending before him. Mr. Sasthi Charan Roy for the petitioner has urged that such direction offends against the Constitutional provisions of Art. 20(3), which provides that no person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. Mr. Roy has referred to a decision of the Supreme Court (M. P. Sharma v. Satish Chan-dra, : 1978(2)ELT287(SC) ) where it was held that an accused could not be compelled to produce an incriminating document or a document which might prove incriminating, and that compulsory production of such document was included within the term 'the accused being compelled to be a witness against himself'. In that case their L...
Abdus Samad Vs. Majitan Bibi and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-30-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Cal540,65CWN696
Banerjee, J. 1. This appeal is directed against an appellate decree affirming the decree passed by a learnedMunsiff. 2. The property in dispute belonged to two persons, Majitan Bibi, defendant No. 1, who was said to have two annas share and Noor Mahammed, a resident of Mandalay, in Burma, who was said to have fourteen annas share. 3. In the year 1940, Noor Mahammed executed a power-of-attorney (Exhibit 3) in favour of one Abdul Hamid, authorising the latter to sell and dispose of the former's properties, to sign deeds of transfer on his behalf and to present such document for registration. 4. On the strength of the said power-of attorney Abdul Hamid executed three deeds of sale, namely, a conveyance executed in August, 1941 (Ext. 1), by which he sold lands described inlot No. 1 of the schedule to the plaint to the plaintiff, a conveyance executed in May, 1942 (Ext. 1a), by which he sold plot No. 405 out of the plots described in Lot No. II of the schedule to the plaint to the plaintiff...
National Tobacco Co. of India Ltd. Vs. Indian Airlines Corporation
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-29-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Cal383
U.C. Law, J.1. On 15th September 1953 the plaintiff delivered to the defendant 20 cases of John Peel Magnum cigarettes for carriage by air from Calcutta to Madras for reward of Rs. 384.50 nP. which was duly paid to the defendant. By a consignment note No. 7072049 dated 15-9-1953 the defendant acknowledged receipt of the goods. At the back of the consignment note the conditions of carriage are set out which it appears were accepted by the plaintiff. It is not disputed that the goods were in perfect condition when they were handed over to the defendant for despatch. The plaintiff's Case is that on 17th September 1953 when the goods were, offered to them by the defendant at the destination they were found to be severely damaged and completely soaked in water so as to be beyond salvage and as the goods were a total loss they refused to take delivery. It is stated that the nature of damage to the goods was unusual in transactions of carriage by air and was caused by misconduct and/or neglig...
Momtaz Begum Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-1960
Reported in: AIR1962Cal202,(1962)IILLJ443Cal
ORDER1. The petitioner is a director of United Rubber Works (Private Limited. The prosecution concerned is one under Section 14(2) of the Employees' Provident Funds Act, 1952 (Act XIX of 1952) read with Clauses (a), (c) and (e) of paragraph 76 of the Scheme framed under the Act Upon the applicant being summoned, she applied for dispensation of her personal attendance in Court under Section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This application was refused. The applicant then moved the Additional Sessions Judge, 5th Court Alipore but her prayer was again refused. Thereafter the present Rule was issued.2. Upon due notice to the State Mr. Dutt has contended that the present prosecution as against the petitioner should be quashed on the ground that the petition of complaint did not disclose any offence so far as the petitioner was concerned. In support of this contention Mr. Dutt has not only taken me through the petition of complaint but has referred to Section 14A of the Employees' Prov...
T.D. Kumar and Bros. Private Ltd. Vs. Iron and Steel Controller and or ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Cal258,65CWN1142
D.N. Sinha, J.1. The facts in this case are shortly as follows: The petitioner company carries on business in iron and steel materials. It is a well known business house in Calcutta, and has been carrying on business since 1940, having been incorporated as a company in 1923. Ever since the inception of statutory control of the distribution of Iron and Steel in 1941, the petitioner company has been registered as a stock-holder under the Iron and Steel Control Orders. The petitioner company had also been appointed as a 'Controlled Stockholder', but in this application we are not concerned with that aspect of the matter. In this case we are concerned with events which occurred in 1957. At that time, the Iron and Steel (Control) Order, 1956, promulgated in exercise of powers conferred by the Central Government by Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 was in operation. This order superseded the Iron and Steel (Control of Production and Distribution) Order, 1941 and the Iron and S...
National Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs. Ashutosh Mukherjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-25-1960
Reported in: AIR1962Cal27
G.K. Mitter, J.1. This is an application for an interim injunction pending the determination of the suit to restrain the defendant, his servants and agents from publishing the words mentioned in paragraph 4 of the petition or any of them or any similar words or words to the like effect which are defamatory of the plaintiff.2. This suit was filed on June 13, 1960, by the plaintiff, a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act and having its registered office at No. 15, Chittaranjan Avenue, Calcutta, within the jurisdiction, of this Court. The defendant is described in the plaint as the printer, publisher and editor of a Bengali weekly newspaper called 'Mayurakshi' having circulation among other places in Calcutta within the jurisdiction of this Court and in the district of Birbhum. The full text of the publication, a good portion whereof is in Bengali, is contained in Annexure 'A' to the plaint. It refers to the way in which the plaintiff company carries on business and there c...
Bhuban Chandra Sadhukhan Vs. Biswanath Dey
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-24-1960
Reported in: AIR1962Cal34,65CWN437
P. Chatterjee, J. 1. This is a second appeal arising out of an objection under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure and is on behalf of the judgment-debtor. The objection of the Judgment-debtor was that the notarial bond, grosses cony of which was obtained on 30th January, 1952, is not directly executable. The answer of the decree-holder is that it is so executable and the judgment-debtor not having taken the objection in question in an earlier objection under Section 47 of the Code cannot now raise the objection and it is barred by the doctrine of constructive res judicata. The Munsiff held that it was not necessary for him to go into the merits of the objection but he held that this objection was barred by the principle of constructive res judicata. Against that there was an appeal. The Subordinate Judge held that the previous miscellaneous case No. 54/58 was dismissed for default for non-appearance of both Parties on the date of heaing. The learned Judge held that under Order 9...
Satya Narayan Khan Vs. Income-tax Officer, Calcutta, and Others.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-24-1960
Reported in: [1962]46ITR920(Cal)
RENUPADA MUKHERJEE J. - This appeal arises out of a suit instituted by the appellant, Satya Narayan Khan, in the trial court for several reliefs. The principal relief prayed for by the plaintiff was for a declaration that a certificate filed by the Certificate Officer of Alipore, 24-Parganas, in Certificate Case No. 2069 I.T. -51-52 is invalid, in-operative and not binding upon the plaintiff. Some other reliefs were also prayed for, which are incidental to the main relief. There was also a prayer for a declaration that the assessment made on the dissolved firm is illegal and ultra vires. This last prayer was not pressed in this appeal.The suit was contested in the trail court be defendants Nos. 3 and 4, namely, the Income-tax Officer, District I, Calcutta, and the Union of India. The grounds of contest will appear from the body of the judgment. The suit was dismissed by the trial court which refused all the prayers asked for by the plaintiff. So this appeal was preferred by the plainti...
Golam Khan Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-19-1960
Reported in: AIR1961Cal408
ORDERP.B. Mukharji, J.1. This is an application by Golam Khan under Article 226 of the Constitution asking for a Writ of Certiorari and Mandamus to quash and restrain the order dated 12th January, 1960 under section 3(2)(c) of the Foreigners Act, 1940 (Act XXXI of 1946).2. The order is by the Governor and reads as follows :'In exercise of the powers conferred by subsection (2) of section 3 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 (XXXI of 1946) as amended by the Foreigners Laws (Amendment) Act, 1957 (XI of 1957), and delegated to the State Government in Notification No. 4/3-56-F. 1 dated the 19th April, 1958, of the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, the State Government is pleased to direct that the foreigner known as Mr. Gulam Khan s/o Shariff Khan an Afgan national (i) shall not remain in India after the expiry of 30 days from the date on which this order is served on him; and (ii) shall not thereafter re-enter India'. 2a. Admittedly the petitioner is an Afgan National. Admittedly ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »