Kolkata Court July 1962 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.
Haridas Mundra Vs. National and Grindlays Bank Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-31-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Cal132,67CWN58
Bachawat, J. 1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff from a decree dis-missing his suit, claiming a perpetual Injunction restraining the defendant banking company from selling the shares pledged by him with the defendant. The plaintiff had a current overdraft account with the defendant. To secure the overdraft, the plaintiff pledged divers shares with the defendant. The plaintiff executed a letter of lien dated April 27, 1955, empowering the defendant to sell and dispose of the shares on default of payment of the moneys due on demand. On July 1, 1959, the plaintiff was indebted to the defendant for the sum of Rs. 36,46,627-82 nP. On July 1, 1959 the defendant instituted suit No. 858 of 1959 against the plaintiff for the recovery of Its dues and obtained leave under Order 2 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to take appropriate proceedings in respect of the shares. We are informed that this suit has now been decreed in full. During the pendency of this suit, on February 6, 1960 t...
Protap Chandra Koyal Vs. Kalicharan Acharya
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-27-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Cal468
B. Mukherji, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff Pratap Chandra Kayal whose suit against Kali Charan Acharya for damages caused by breach of a contract fails in both the Courts.2. The contract dated April 23, 1937 (exhibit 1) was that Pratap would pay to Kalicharan Rs. 316/- by Chaitra's end of 1348 B.S. (1942) whereupon Kali Charan would reconvey moiety shares admeasuring 6.21 acres in certain plots of land. An 'ekrarnama' as that - such a familiar device - had to be resorted to, because Pratap had taken a loan of Rs. 300/- (as the averment in the plaint goes) from Kali Charan that very day, namely, on April 23, 1937 and executed a deed of sale (exhibit 2-a) in his favour for the same land reconveyance of which was secured by the 'ekrarnama'. Be that as it may, Pratap did tender the specified sum within the appointed time. But Kali Charan would not take it. That led to a suit for specific performance of the contract by Pratap against Kali Charan in 1945. It failed in the Court of ...
Nitya Gopal De Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-26-1962
Reported in: AIR1964Cal340
ORDERP.B. Mukharji, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution by Nitya Gopal De, a voter of Madhya Narayanpur Gram Panchayat, P. S. Karimpur, Union Nara-yanpur in the district of Nadia. The petition is directed against the election of Pradhan under the West Bengal Panchayat Act of 1956. 2. In the petition it is alleged that the petitioner Is a voter and his name is included in the Electoral Roll of the West Bengal Legislative Assembly in Part 35 at page 3 of village Narayanpur (Purbapara), Union Narayanpur, P. O. Amiya Narayanpur, Police Station Karimpur, district Nadia pertaining to the constituency in which Gram Panchayat Madhya Narayanpur is situate. The Electoral Roll is prepared by the prescribed authority under Section 7 of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1956. That Electoral Roll is the only register of voters which determines and governs the election of members of Gram Panchayats, members of Anchal Panchayats, election of Adhyaksa, Upa-Adhyaksha of Gram P...
Tailors Priya, a Firm Vs. Gulabchand Danraj, a Firm
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-25-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Cal36
Bachawat, J. 1. On August 30, 1961, the plaintiff instituted a suit in the City Civil Court, Calcutta under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure claiming a decree on a dishonoured cheque dated 29th July, 1961 drawn by the defendant and payable to the plaintiff or order. The cheque is crossed generally and is marked with the words 'a/c payee only.' Those words are written within the transverse lines of the crossing. The writ of summons in the prescribed form was served on the defendant on September 19. On September 25the defendant filed a petition praying for extension of the time to make an application for leave to appear and to defend the suit. The petition was rejected by the Registrar on September 28. On October 6, the defendant filed another petition asking for leave to appear and to defend the suit. By an order dated October 7, 1961 the Judge dismissed this petition. The defendant has moved this Court in revision against this order and has obtained a rule. The revision case...
Bajoria Agency (Private) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Iron and Steel Controller and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-23-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Cal355,67CWN120
ORDERB.N. Banerjee, J.1. This Rule is directed against two orders made against the petitioner company, under the Iron and Steel (Control) Order, 1956, hereinafter referred to as the 'Control Order'. The first order was made under Clause 11 of the Control Order, by which the petitioner company was directed not to remove or permit the removal of a specified tonnage of M. S. Plates, whether sold or unsold, from its stock yard or from any other part of its premises to any place outside thereof, without the written permission of the Iron and Steel Controller. The second order was made under Clause 12 (2) (b) of the Control Order, by which the petitioner company was directed to furnish a category-wise statement of iron and steel lying in its stock yard as on the date of the order. Both the orders are dated June 13, 1959. The petitioner company prays for a writ of Certiorari for the quashing of the orders and for a writ of Mandamus restraining the respondents from 'giving effect thereto.2. Th...
Sm. Benarashi Debi and ors. Vs. Mackintosh Burn Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-20-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Cal258
Sinha, J. 1.This is an appeal against an order of Mukherji J., dated the 7th June, 1960. The facts are briefly as follows:2. W.N. Hickie had an interest in a pro petty, which might be called the Sodepur property It consisted of about 16 bighas of land, on which it is said, Hickie erected, or proposed to erect a factory. 3. On or about the 2oth September, 1946, he mortgaged the property in favour of Sm. Santa Debi. Thereafter, he made a second mortgage in favour of Sm. Benarashi Debi. On the 13th January, 1947, Santa Debi instituted a suit for enforcement of her mortgage, making Benarashi Debi, the puisne mortgagee, a party. This suit is Suit No. 108 of 1947. 4. In 1947, Messrs. Mackintosh Burn Ltd., filed a suit against Hickie, being Suit No. 605 of 1947, for the recovery of the amount due to it for certain construction works done in the Sodepur property. 5. On the 14th September, 1949, a preliminary mortgage decree was passed in Suit No. 108 of 1947, mentioned above. By the preliminar...
Dasarath Gayen Vs. Satyanarayan Ghosh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-20-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Cal325,67CWN110
P.B. Mukharji, J. 1. This is a second appeal arising out of a suit for specific performance instituted by the plaintiff Satyanarayan Ghosh, a major, against the first defendant Dasarath Gayen, a major and 9 other defendants of whom seven are minors represented by their natural guardian and father. The first defendant alone is the main defendant. The rest of the defendants from 2 to 10 including these minors are only pro forma defendants. The suit was decreed against the first defendant and he was called upon to execute the conveyance at the plaintiff's costs in favour of the plaintiff within one month from the date of the decree, in default of which execution the plaintiff would have it executed through the Court at his costs. 2. The first defendant appealed to the learned District Judge who dismissed his appeal on the 24th April, 1961 and also dismissed some of the cross-objections which were not pressed. The learned District Judge confirmed the decree passed by the learned Subordinat...
Tons Jute Co. Ltd. Vs. Kissenlal Bangur
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-18-1962
Reported in: AIR1963Cal322
Sinha, J.1. This is an appeal from an order of Ray, I. dated the 24th March 1960, by which the learned Judge has set aside an award of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce dated the 15th September, 1955 and has declared the same to be null and void The facts are as follows:2. By contract No. 203, dated the 30th January 1952, the appellant sold and the respondent bought, 150,000 yards of Hessian cloth, delivery April/May/June 1952, at the rate of 50,000 yards monthly. There was the usual arbitration clause for reference to the Tribunal of Arbitration of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce.3. The appellant's case is that it tendered the pucca delivery order to the respondent, in respect of the May portion, together with the bill, but the respondent failed to accept or pay for the same. Thereupon, on the 6th June, 1952 the appellant resold the same at a public auction, with a shortfall of Rs. 9525/7/6. Similarly, on or about the 28th June, 1952 the appellant tendered the pucca delivery order in resp...
Gillanders Arbuthnot and Co. Ltd. Vs. the Commercial Tax Officer and a ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-1962
Reported in: AIR1964Cal477,68CWN1
ORDERB.N. Banerjee, J. 1. The petitioner, a Company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, is a dealer registered under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941. At all material times the petitioner Company was the selling agent of Sone Valley Portland Cement Co., Ltd., having its factory at Japla, in the State of Bihar, and the Managing Agent of Indian Copper Corporation Ltd., having its factory at Ghatsila, also in the State of Bihar. 2. Between April 1, 1955 and March 31, 1956, the petitioner company says, it sold diverse quantities of Cement to various parties in different parts of India, including West Bengal, from the Cement factory at Japla and also made similar sales of copper ingots, brass and yellow metal sheets, from the copper factory at Ghatsila. 3. Cement, it is not disputed, was a controlled commodity during the material period. By an order, dated 18-8-1948, made under the West Bengal Cement Control Act, 1948; it was provided that none shall dispose of or agree to ...
Sm. Malati De and anr. Vs. Dhanapati Dutta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-12-1962
Reported in: AIR1964Cal41,66CWN879
P.N. Mookerjee, J. 1. This appeal has been placed before us at the instance of the parties for hearing on the preliminary point of its competency. The point has been raised as a pure point or law by the respondents and it is upon that footing that the matter falls to be decided at this stage. 2. The appeal in question is from an order of the learned District Judge, Burdwan, granting probate with a copy of the Will in question annexed. There were certain conditions, imposed on this grant, but the respondents do not contend that the imposition of those conditions would make the order, granting probate, as aforesaid, any the less a final order. 3. The respondents' objection is that the present appellant, whose intervention, at an earlier stage, by filling a caveat, following the issue of general citation in this case, was refused by the learned District Judge on the ground that she had no locus standi to file any caveat in the instant case, she not having, according to the said learned Ju...