Kolkata Court May 1963 Judgments
Joti Jiban Ghosh Vs. State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-28-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Cal59,1964CriLJ184
ORDERAmaresh Roy, J. 1. This Rule was issued upon an application made by one of the accused persons in a criminal case pending before a Magistrate at Sealdah in which charges have been framed against three accused persons for alleged offences under Sections 147, 323 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code. The prayer in the Rule is for quashing the charges framed against the petitioner Jyotijiban Ghosh. It has to be observed that, in the certified copy of the charge Tiled with the petition in this Court, the name of Jyotijiban Ghosh has been wrongly mentioned as Jyotijiban Shah. That bespeaks of carelessness with which the copy was compared and certified to be a true copy in the Magistrate's Court.2. Appearing in support of the Rule, the learned Advocate Mr. Nikhil Chandra Talukdar has urged that the case having been instituted upon a police report the procedure under Section 251A of the Code of Criminal Procedure was followed and, for framing the charges under the provisions of Section 251A ...
Tag this Judgment!Brahma Swaroop Gupta Vs. Diwan Chand Minotra
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-28-1963
Reported in: AIR1963Cal583,67CWN947
Bachawat, J. 1. This is an appeal from an order directing the issue of a writ of attachment in execution of a decree. On December 19, 1955, the appellant and the respondent submitted their disputes to the arbitration of Sri Ram Chandra Singhi. On April 30, 1956 the arbitrator made his award. Clauses 2, 4 and 7 of the award read as follows:Clause--2: 'The said Brahma Swaroop Gupta do pay a sum of Rupees Twenty thousand to the said Diwanchand Minotra within a fortnight from the date hereof and the said Diwanchan Minotra to deliver two hundred ordinary shares held by him in the capital of the said Eagle Paint and Pigment Industries Ltd., in his own name or in the names of his friends and relatives to, and also make over the relative transfer deeds duly executed in favour of Brahma Swaroop Gupta or his nominee or nominees against payment of the said sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand) only.' Clause --4: 'The said Brahma Swaroop Gupta will pay a sum of Rupees Five thousand to the s...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Agnes Cecillia Gome (Gannon) Vs. Lancelot Ashley Gome
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-24-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Cal28,67CWN740
Laik. J. 1. This has come up before us exercising jurisdiction over matrimonial causes under Section 17 of the Indian Divorce Act (Act IV of 1869), hereinafter referred to as the Act, for confirmation of a decree nisi passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 24 Parganas, dissolving the marriage. 2. It was a wife's petition under Section 10 of the Act. The grounds were adultery with the other aggravated circumstance, viz., cruelty. The petitioner has two minor children, born out of the wedlock living with her. The learned Judge passed the decree mentioned above and also directed custody of the children to the petitioner. The husband (respondent) was further directed to pay a monthly sum of Rs. 250/- to the wife (petitioner) as alimonv pending the suit. 3. I have reviewed the entire evidence. All pertinent facts are brought out to prevent the blinding of our eyes. The parties profess Christian religion. They were legally married. They were of Indian domicile at the date of the pr...
Tag this Judgment!Susanta Kumar Mitra Vs. Sm. Himangshu Prova Mitra
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-24-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Cal33,68CWN683
P.B. Mukharji, J.1. These proceedings have come up before us for confirmation under Section 17 of the Indian Divorce Act. The learned Judge decreed the suit ex parte without costs subject to confirmation by this Court. The petition was by the husband against the wife for dissolution of the marriage.2. The petitioner examined himself and called his mother as a witness. On that evidence the learned Judge gave the decree as aforesaid.3. The learned Judge treats this petition as one under Section 10 of the Indian Divorce Act on the ground of adultery coupled with desertion without reasonable excuse for more than two years. Unfortunately he has failed to notice that the word 'adultery' was not even alleged in the petition. Paragraph 5 of the petition says that 'the respondent used to bring people into the house and used to pass nights with them'. That, in our opinion. Is notenough assertion and allegation of the actual act of adultery. Adultery must at least be averred and alleged in the pe...
Tag this Judgment!Natendra N. Chowdhury and anr. Vs. the Institute of Engineers India an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-24-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Cal73,67CWN960
A.N. Ray, J. 1. The plaintiff is a member of the Institution of Engineers. The Institution is a body incorporated under a charter containing a Grant by the Crown of the United Kingdom in the form of Letters Patent under the King's Sign Manual dated September 9, 1935 under an Order in Council of His Majesty dated August 13, 1935,on the report of the Committee of the Lords of His Majesty's most Hon'ble Privy Council dated August 1, 1935. Originally the Institution was a body incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1913.2. The suit was instituted for a declaration that certain bye-laws passed by the general bodyof corporate members of the Institution at a meeting specially convened for the purpose on November 26, 1960 are ultra vires, illegal, not according to law, and not binding on the plaintiffs, the defendant Institution and/or members. Thedeclaration is also asked for that the bye-laws made by the general body of the defendant Institution on January 31, 1950 and approved by the ...
Tag this Judgment!Tarapada Sarkar Vs. Nepal Gazi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-24-1963
Reported in: AIR1965Cal354
ORDERS.N. Niyogi, J.1. The petitioner Tarapada Sarkar instituted Money Suit No. 95 of 1955 against defendant No. 1 Nepal Gazi and the Chakraborties (Defendants Nos. 2 and S), who are the opposite parties in this case, in the fourth Court of Munsif at Alipore for recovery of certain sum of money on account of his share of produce of some land In respect of the year 1361 U.S. This suit was contested by the defendants by filing a joint written statement. The date of peremptory hearing of the suit was fixed on 1-9-1959 and as the defendants failed to attend the Court or take any steps on that date, the suit was eventually decreed ex parte. Thereafter the defendants applied for setting aside the ex parte decree by filing an application under the provisions of Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the case was numbered as Misc. J. Case No. 192 of 1989. The above case was heard analogously with Misc. J. Case No, 193 of 1959, which arose out of a similar application filed under O...
Tag this Judgment!Samunder Singh and ors. Vs. State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-24-1963
Reported in: AIR1965Cal598,1965CriLJ713
Debabrata Mookerjee, J. 1. Seven persons were arraigned for offences in connection with plunder and murder at the Kanoria house 15, Burdwan Road. Of them one Pratap Singh was tendered pardon and made an approver. At a trial held by an Additional Sessions Judge of 24 Paraganas four of them Samunder Singh, Bhamar Singh, Nandalal Singh and Ruhr Singh have been convicted of dacoity with murder under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to death. These four have in addition been convicted of conspiracy to commit dacoity with another named Bhur Singh and sentenced under Section 120B/395 of the Code to imprisonment for life. The said Bhur Singh and another called Bhagirath Singh charged respectively under Sections 396/109 and 412 of the Code, for abetment of dacoity with murder and for dishonestly receiving stolen property in the commission of the dacoity, have been acquitted by the trial Judge. 2. The convicted persons have appealed. The four condemned men have appeared by coun...
Tag this Judgment!Priyatosh Mazumdar on Behalf of Jogeshwar Mazumdar Detenu Vs. State of ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-1963
Reported in: AIR1963Cal589,1963CriLJ499
Debabrata Mookerjee, J. 1. This is a son's petition for the release of his father, a detenu against whom an order was made by the District Magistrate of Nadia on January 18, 1963 under Section 3(2) of the Preventive Detention Act. 2. The detenu was in due course informed of his right to make a representation against the order of detention; he made one and was given personal hearing before the Advisory Board. On a consideration of the materials produced the Board reported that there was sufficient cause for detention. The State Government, thereafter, confirmed the order. 3. The impugned order recited that with a view to prevent the detenu from acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, it was necessary to direct his detention. The detenu challenges the validity and propriety of the order and urges that most of the grounds of particulars supplied to him are wholly unrelated to the question of public order. 4. In answer to the Rule the District Magistrate who happ...
Tag this Judgment!Chairman, Rishra Municipality Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Cal384,1964CriLJ281
Amaresh Roy, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by a complainant, the Chairman of the Rishra Municipality, against an order of acquittal passed by the learned Magistrate of Serampore in a prosecution for an alleged offence under Section 7, read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. The prosecution case was that the accused persons, namely, Madhusudan Dey and Sm. Manjuri Bala Dey, who were the seller and the proprietor respectively of a confectionery shop, had sold curd (Dahi) which, on chemical analysis, was found not to conform to the standard of quality prescribed by the Rules framed under that Act. The charge for storing and selling and exposing for sale adulterated Dahi in that confectionery shop at 78 Grand Trunk Road West, within Rishra Municipality. In the petition of complaint, besides the two accused named above there was another accused person Nishakar Modak, who was said to be an employee at that shop. The Food Inspector of Rishra Municipality, P...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Haque and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-10-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Cal183,67CWN1064
D.N. Sinha, J. 1. The petitioners are inhabitants of village Naksha within the Police Station Mogra, District Hooghly, and C. S. plots Nos. 325, 326, 364 and 379 of the said Mouza Naksha were khas lands of the zemindars, namely, the Biswas family of Hooghly. The lands were however recorded in the last district settlement khatian as ^^lk/kkj.ksj xkspj ** (Original Bengali -- Ed.) At the time when the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953 came into force, these lands vested In the State Government. The Junior Land Reforms Officer, Sadar Circle, Estates Acquisition Department, Chinsurah, invited applications from the residents of the locality for settlement of the said lands. Various persons made applications for settlement and upon enquiry it was found that the petitioners were in possession of the said plots. On or about the 12th September, 1959 which corresponds with the Bengali year 1365, the land was settled with the petitioners at a rental of Rs. 10/- per acre.Thereafter, the pe...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »