Kolkata Court April 1964 Judgments
Surendranath Paul Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-29-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Cal183
Bose, C.J.1. This is an appeal from an order of Mallick, J. dated the 19th July 1963 staying a suit under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940.2. The appellant who is a contractor under the Controller of Stationery, Government of India, entered into certain contracts with the Controller of Printing and Stationery, Calcutta representing the respondent Union of India for the supply of envelopes, flaps ungummed of different sizes and for the supply of exercise books etc. and deposited a sum of Rs. 12,777/- as security money. The contracts contained an arbitration clause being Clause XVII of the general conditions of contract. The said arbitration clause is as follows: (XVII). Arbitration--'Except where herein otherwise provided any dispute or difference arising; during or after the subsistence of this contract touching any clause, matter or thing herein contained, or the operation or construction hereof, or the rights, duties or liabilities of either party under or in connection therew...
Tag this Judgment!Tejman Vs. D.P. Anand and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-29-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Cal517
P.C. Mallick, J.1. This is a suit challenging a confiscation order passed by the Collector ofCentral Excise and Land Customs. The goods confiscated are a number of wrist watches and Parker fountain pens, all of foreign make. The defendants impleaded are the said Collector of Central Excise as also the Union of India. The plaintiff claims to be a bona fide purchaser of the said goods. In August, 1953, the plaintiff was prosecuted in the Court of the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta, on a charge of being in possession of the said goods alleged to be stolen goods. He was, however, acquitted on November 13, 1953. Immediately thereafter, proceedings were started under the Land Customs Act and notices were served on the plaintiff to show cause why the said goods should not be confiscated. The plaintiff showed cause in writing and submitted that the goods were not liable to confiscation, on grounds more fully stated in his answer to the 'show cause' noticed. The defendant Collector of Ce...
Tag this Judgment!Ali Ahmad Vs. Electoral Registration Officer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-24-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Cal1,1965CriLJ22,68CWN1140
Bachawat, J. 1. The appellant and his parents were all born in the district of Birbhum. He had his ancestral home in that district. He was serving in the Posts and Telegraphs Department. In 1947 he opted for Pakistan. The option was provisional for six months and thereafter became final. The final exercise of option to serve the Pakistan Government is strong evidence of migration within the meaning of Article 7 of the Constitution (see Aslam v. Fazal, : AIR1959All79 . According to the appellant he left his wife in India and she visited him twice in 1948 and 1952. Article 7 is peremtory in its scope and makesno exemption for a husband migrating to Pakistanleaving his wife in India, (see State of Bihar v.Amar Singh, : [1955]1SCR1259 . The appellant stayed in Pakistan for six years. He returned to India in 1953 along with his wife under a Pakistani passport. Independently of Schedule III, Rule 3 of the Citizenship Rules, 1956, the Pakistan passport is strong evidence of the Pakistani nati...
Tag this Judgment!Biswanath Agarwalla Vs. Sm. Dhapu Debi Jajodia and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-24-1964
Reported in: AIR1966Cal13
Mitter, J.1. This is a plaintiffs appeal from a decree dismissing his suit for a declaration that he was the adopted son of one Rampratap Udhani alias Rampratap Agarwalla who died in the year 1940 and for possession of the estate of the said deceased. The plaintiff further claimed that an immovable property in Calcutta namely premises Nos. 1 and 2 Jagabandhu Boral Lane had been purchased by the said deceased in the benami of his wife Munia and that a deed of trust executed by the said Munia in respect of the said property was void. The learned trial Judge held against the plaintiff both on the question of adoption and on the question of benami purchase. The plaintiff has not pressed the appeal on the question of benami or the validity of the deed of trust and has limited the appeal to the sole question of adoption.2. Rampratap Udhani came to Calcutta from the village of Ghatoa in Rajasthan many years ago. He started a sweetmeat shop at premises No. 16, Mallick Lane, at first renting a ...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Halim Mia Vs. the Sub-divisional Officer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-24-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Cal160
Bachawat, J. 1. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Katwa, summarily rejected the appellant's application for registration of his name as an Indian citizen under Section 5(1)(a) of the Citizenship Act 1955. Mr. Ali contends that the officer acted illegally and in excess of his jurisdiction in dismissing the application summarily without making an enquiry. In support of this contention Mr. Ali relies upon thedecision in the case of Sk. Hakimuddin v. Dy. Secy. Govt. of West Bengal, : AIR1961Cal299 . 2. Now Section 5(1)(a) of the Citizenship Act 1955 read with Rule 7 of the Citizenship Rules 1956 empowers the collector to register as a citizen of India, on application made in this behalf, any person who is ordinarily resident in India and who has been so resident for six months immediately before making the application. Section 14(1) provides that the collector may in his discretion grant or refuse the application and shall not be required to assign any reasons for such grant or refusal. Section ...
Tag this Judgment!The State Vs. Debabrata Bandopadhyay, Dist. Magistrate, Nadia and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-24-1964
Reported in: AIR1964Cal572,1964CriLJ660,69CWN82
P.B. Mukharji, J.1. On this Rule the District Magistrate of Nadia Mr. Debabrata Bandopadhyay, I.A. S., is standing his trial for contempt of court, on the ground of forcibly turning out Mr. M. Roy, the learned Subordinate Judge, Nadia from his residence at Circuit House and thereby compelling him to leave his station of justice and also making it imposst-ble for him to hold his Court for four days and a half and bringing down the Judge, In the estimation of the local public. The situation is unprecedented in the annals ef public services in India. The facts and circumstances revealed on the record, are of momentous significance. Affidavits disclose most distressing and deplorable features in the administration, which will continue to serve as aserious warning and lesson long after the memory of this case fades away.2. On the 22nd January, 1964, by the order of this Magistrate the learned Subordinate Judge of the districtwas literally driven out of his room in the Circuit House at Nadia...
Tag this Judgment!Ghasilal Todi Vs. Biswanath Kerwal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-22-1964
Reported in: AIR1964Cal466
ORDERP.C. Mallick, J.1. This is an application challenging the validity of an arbitration proceeding and the award made thereunder. It is prayed that the award made on May 23, 1962 in the said arbitration proceeding be set aside. It is prayed in the alternative that the appointment of Madanlal Dalmia as sole arbitrator be set aside. There is a third alternative prayer for remitting the award for reconsideration.2. Shortly the facts relevant for the purpose of this application may now be stated. The petitioners are owners of a rice mill situate at Beliatore in the district of Bankura. On November 16, 1960, they entered into a partnership, agreement with the respondent for carrying on the said business. The respondent under the agreement was required to advance money both by way of capital and loan to the partnership. It is not necessary to set out and consider the other terms of the partnership except Clause 29 which is the arbitration clause. Disputes arose between the parties --each c...
Tag this Judgment!S.K. Rungta and Co. (Jute and Seeds) Vs. Nawal Kishore Debi Prosad and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-20-1964
Reported in: AIR1964Cal373
ORDERP.C. Mallick, J.1. This is an application for stay under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. This suit was instituted by the plaintiff firm forthe recovery of the sum of Rs. 7669.87 np. on a commission agency agreement. The defendants impleaded arethe firm of Nawal Kishore Debi Prosad, with whom the plaintiff had the said commission agency agreement. Defendants No. 2 and 3, are the partners of the said firm of Nawal Kishore Debi Prosad. It is alleged in the plaint that the defendant firm has become liable to pay under the said agreement the sum claimed in the plaint, the accounts between the two firms, in terms of the agreement, were adjusted at the end of the Sambat years and the amount claimed has been found to be due on such adjustment. After giving credit for the amounts paid, for the recovery of the balance the instant suit has been instituted. Two of the defendants, namely, the defendant firm and defendant No. 2 have not entered appearance for have they filed their ...
Tag this Judgment!Nemai Adak and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-17-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Cal89,1965CriLJ160
T.P. Mukherji, J.1. These seven appeals arise out of a trial held by the Additional Sessions Judge of Howrah. The appellants in these appeals are ten in number and they along with twoothers were put on trial before the learned Judge sitting with a jury on charges under Sections 147, 302/149 I. P. C. and on the same evidence they were separately tried bythe learned judge himself for an offence under Section 3of the Explosives Substances Act read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned judge accepting the unanimous verdict of the jury acquitted two of the accused of all the charges framed against them. They are accused No. 3, Kristo Bag and accused No. 11 Haradhan Roy. He further acquitted on a similar verdict of thejury accused No. 6 Jotiram Mondal and accused No. 7 NemaiAdak of the charges under the Indian Penal Code sections,but convicted, them under Section 3 of the Explosive Substances Act.2. On a verdict of 5 to 4 returned by the jury thelearned judge convicted accuse...
Tag this Judgment!insurance Association of India Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-17-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Cal294,69CWN57
ORDERD.N. Sinha, J. 1. The facts in this case are shortly as follows: 'The Insurance Association of India' is a body corporate which has been brought into existence by virtue of Section 64A of the Insurance Act, 1938 (Central Act IV of 1938) as amended by Act 47 of 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). Under that provision, all insurers carrying on insurance business in India at the commencement of the amending Act, 1950, all Insurers who may after such commencement begin to carry on insurance business in India and, if the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, so declares, all provident societies carrying on insurance business in India, have been constituted a body corporate by the name of the Insurance Association of India', (hereinafter referred to as the 'Association') having perpetual succession and a common seal. Under Section 64C of the said Act, there shall be two Councils of the Insurance Association of India, namely, (a) 'the Life Insurance Counci...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »