Kolkata Court July 1961 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.
Titagarh Jute Factory Co., Ltd. Vs. Third Industrial Tribunal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-1961
Reported in: (1962)ILLJ328Cal
B.N. Banerjee, J.1. The petitioner company is the owner of a Jute mill at Titagarh, known as the Titagarh Jute Mill 2. The respondent 2 was a worker under the petitioner company, being a durwan employed in the said mill. Between the petitioner company and its workers, an industrial dispute, at the material time, was pending before the third industrial tribunal, on the following issues:(i) Supply of coal and firewoods to workers: (ii) supply of boots and putties; (iii) overtime wages for dak durwans; and (iv) fixation of permanent complement of durwans.2. On 26 March 1958, respondent 2 was on leave. At about 4 p.m. on that date he was, it is alleged, caught by several workers with stolen hessian and bags and hessian cloth, sewn in a bed-role, while trying to escape by the mill gate. Although caught, respondent 2 subsequently managed to escape and thereafter fled to his native place. The act of respondent 2 amounted to misconduct, punishable with dismissal, under Rule 14(c)(ii) of the st...
Comrade Bank Limited (In Liquidation) Vs. Jyoti Bala Dassi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-10-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Cal86,[1962]32CompCas990(Cal),66CWN761
ORDERDebabrata Mookerjee, J.1. This is an application under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure directed against an order made by a Munsif at Rampurhat, declining to give effect to the petitioner's objection that by reason of the provisions contained in the Banking Companies Act, the court at Rampurhat suffered from want of jurisdiction to entertain a claim preferred by the opposite party under Order 21 Rule 58 of the Code of Civil Procedure,2. It appears that the petitioner bank in liquidation instituted a suit on the 6th of August, 1952 against one Krishnapada Sadhu, the husband of the opposite party and her son Dhwajahari Sadhu for recovery of a sum of Rs. 798-l-6p with interest and for other reliefs. The plaintiff's case was that the sum had become due and owing to the petitioner by the said defendants on a mutual, Open and current account with over-draft facilities which the said defendants had with the petitioner Bank. On the 3rd February, 1956, a decree was made with inte...
Everett Orient Line Vs. Jasjit Singh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-07-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Cal303
G.K. Mitter, J. 1. This is an appeal from an order of refusal to issue a writ of certiorari to quash an order made by the Additional Collector of Customs on September 14, 1957 for confiscation of a vessel under Section 52-A read with Section 167 (12A) of the Sea Customs Act on the ground that the said vessel had entered the Indian Customs Waters with a recess or a hole under the floor of the fireman's cabin, aft, port side, constructed solely for the purpose of concealing goods. The applicant is a company incorporated at Monrovia in the Republic of Liberia in West Africa called the Everett Orient Line Incorporated and it carries on business in Calcutta through its agents Everett Steamship Corporation, The respondents are Jasjit Singh, Additional Collector of Customs, and several other Customs Officers and the Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance.2. Section 52A which was incorporated in the Sea Customs Act under chapter VI-A headed 'Prohibition of entry of vessels c...
Leonard Biermans Workers' Union Vs. Second Industrial Tribunal and Ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-06-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Cal375,65CWN1029,[1961(3)FLR189],(1962)ILLJ68Cal
ORDERB.N. Banerjee, J.1. An industrial dispute between Messrs. Leonard Biermann (hereinafter referred to as the company) and their workers was referred to the Second Industrial Tribunal, by an order dated August 5, 1959. The scope of the dispute was the demand by the workers for introduction of a scheme for payment of gratuity. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that the company was running at a loss for the last few years and was not in a position to hear the burden of gratuity. In that view of the matter the workers' claim for gratuity was rejected find the Tribunal passed an award accordingly. The award was published,under Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947, under a notification, dated July 23, 1960.2. The propriety of the award is being disputed in this Rule, at the instance of the Workers' Union.3. A single point was argued for my consideration in this Rule. It was contended that the Balance Sheets of the company, on the basis of which, the Tribunal came to the conclu...
Bishwanath Kundu Vs. Sm. Subala Dassi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-05-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Cal272
P.N. Mookerjee, J. 1. This is an unfortunate proceeding between a mother and her son. Under a partition decree, the mother, who is the respondent before us was declared to be the owner of one-fifth share of the properties, involved in the said partition suit. This decree, which was in the nature of a preliminary decree for partition, was made on May 22, 1947, in the aforesaid partition suit (Title Suit No. 39 of 1946 of the Second Court of the Subordinate Judge of Howrah). This preliminary decree was adjusted by a subsequent consent order, dated October 1, 1948, whereby the mother decree-holder, who is the respondent before us, agreed to take a monthly allowance of Rs. 90/-per month from the appellant son in lieu of her aforesaid one-fifth share making the said allowance a charge on the said son's allotment In the said order for adjustment, there was a provision also for maintenance and marriage expenses of the four sisters of the appellant.2. On February, 10, 1949, there appears to be...
Prem Chand Kar and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-04-1961
Reported in: 1963CriLJ117
K.C. Sen, J.1.The plaintiffs are the appellants. The appeal arises out of the judgment and decree passed by the learned Subordinate Judge of Midnapore whereby he set aside the Judgment and decree of the learned Munsif, 1st Court, Tamluk. The latter passed a decree against the defendant No. 1, the State of West Bengal and the defendant, No. 2, Nagendra Nath Sen Gupta, the officer-in-criarge of Tamluk police station for recovery of certain movables or their value thereof.2. The plaintiffs case was as follows:-On 21st July, 1949, a dacoity was committed in the house of one Bepin Bhowmlk husband of defendant No. 7. Jn connexion of the dacoity case, one Sk. Khadem was arrested and on his confession before the Sub-Divisional Officer, it was found that he had sold the disputed articles, viz., a necklace, a bicycle syringe and a money-bag to the plaintiff No. 1. On his confession, the house of the plaintiff No. 1 was searched and the articles as stated by Khadem were recovered from the plainti...
Joydeb Haxra Choudhry Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-03-1961
Reported in: (1962)ILLJ468Cal
D.N. Sinha, J.1. The facts in this case are shortly as follows: In 1954, the petitioner was appointed as a lower division clerk in the audit section of the office of the Conservator of Forests, at Darjeeling. On 22 November 1954, he was warned by the Conservator of Forests for being absent on 9 November 1954 which had not been declared a holiday owing to pressure of work. The petitioner protested against the warning. In February 1955, he was served with a charge-sheet to which he replied. On 5 February 1955, he was called into the chamber of the Conservator of Forests where Sri T.K. Mitra, District Forest Officer, Darjeeling and K.C. Ray Choudhury, District Forest Officer, Working Plans Division were present. There, a certain incident happened. The Conservator of Forests thereupon drew up charges against him and dismissed him on that very day. On 11 February 1955, there was an appeal to Government. In August 1955, the appeal was allowed and a fresh enquiry was directed. A fresh charge-...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›