Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian boilers amendment act 2007 section 8 amendment of section 7 Court: privy council Page 20 of about 1,371 results (0.684 seconds)

May 12 1924 (PC)

Emperor Vs. Harendra Chandra Chakravarty

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : (1924)ILR51Cal980

Mukerji, J.1. In the present trial, before the first juror was called, Mr. H.M. Bose, appearing on behalf of the prisoner, claimed that a majority of the jury should be Indians on the ground that the prisoner is an Indian British subject, and based his claim upon the mandatory provisions of Section 275 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Mr. A.K. Basu, appearing on behalf of the Crown, opposed the application on the ground that the claim was not entertainable in view of the fact that it was not put forward before the committing Magistrate. A similar application made on behalf of the prisoner, at the commencement of the trial which has just now proved abortive, was refused by me; but, as on that occasion I did not give my reasons for the order that I then passed, I have allowed the prisoner to raise the point again, and have considered the matter further; but I do not find any reason to alter the opinion which I then formed.2. At the outset I may say at once that I quite agree with the c...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 01 1924 (PC)

AlimuddIn Naskar and ors. Vs. Emperor

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : 85Ind.Cas.231

Hugh Walmsley, J.1. There are two appeals before us and a Reference under Section 374, Cr. P.C. The circumstances are as follows. It is said that the accused had a quarrel with the family of one Momrez and that one night they went to his house and set fire to the hut in which Momrez and his two wives and some children were sleeping: the inmates of this hut were not allowed to escape and they were all burned to death. In other huts Intaz and Bibijan were sleeping and they were also killed.2. The Committing Magistrate framed charges under Section 120B read with Section 302, Indian Penal Code and under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and Section 436, Indian Penal Code. The learned Judge made changes in the charge under Section 120B read with Section 302, Indian Penal Code. The Jury was unanimous in finding all the accused guilty on all the charges. The Judge agreed with the verdict and sentenced two of the men to death, and the others to transportation for life. Hence the two appeals and t...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 16 1938 (PC)

Basangowda Huliappagowda Hiregoudar Vs. Fakirgowda Lingangowda Patil

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1939Bom56; (1938)40BOMLR1288

N.J. Wadia, J.1. The respondent filed the suit out of which this appeal arises for a declaration that he was the nearest heir of Chanbasangowda in respect of the patilki hak of one Chinawa under Section 36 of the Watan Act. The relationship of the parties is given in the pedigrees in the judgments of both the lower Courts. Basangowda Ningangowda, who was entered as the representative watandar in the patilki watan of Adargunchi, died in the year 1876. After him the name of his widow Chinawa was entered as the representative watandar. She died in 1900. Basangowda represented the senior branch of the family. The plaintiff and the defendant belong to the junior branch. Chanbasangowda bin Basangowda, the grandfather of the defendant as well as of the plaintiff, who was the representative of the junior branch, died in the year 1904. His patilki hak was entered in the revenue records in the name of the plaintiff Fakirgowda who was the son of Chanbasangowda's second son Ningangowda. Chanbasang...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 22 1942 (PC)

Messrs. Chimanram Motilal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, (Central), B ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1943Bom132; [1943]11ITR44(Bom)

JUDGEMENT OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNALUnder Section 33 of the Indian Income-tax Act (XI of 1922) the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, (Bombay Branch) (consisting of N. R. GUNDIL, Judicial Member, and P. C. MALHOTRA, Accountant Member) delivered the following judgment on May 10, 1941.'This appeal calls into question a supplementary assessment made by the Income-tax Officer, under Section 34 of the Indian Income-tax Act and confirmed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, A Range, Bombay, on December 9, 1940.2. The contest is in regard to the assessment made in the assessment year 1936-37. The original assessment for the year in question was made by the Income-tax Officer on July 9, 1937 computing the appellants assessable income at Rs. 1,47,160. Some time later, on definite information received, the same Income-tax Officer issued a notice under Section 34 to the appellant to make a fresh return of his income, stating that his income from 'all sources' had partially escaped as...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 02 1943 (PC)

Rm. Ar. Ar. Rm. Ar. Ar. Umayal Achi Vs. Lakshmi Achi and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1944Mad340

Leach, C.J.1. These appeals and civil revision petitions arise out of proceedings instituted in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Devakottah, with reference to the estate of one RM.AR.AR.RM. Arunachalam Chettiar, who died on 23rd February 1938. Appeals Nos. 321 of 1940, 3,104 and 239 of 1941 are from a preliminary decree passed by the Subordinate Judge in a suit for the administration of the estate. The petitions ask for the revision of orders passed in the suit. C. M. A. No. 282 of 1941 is against an order granting probate of a will executed by Arunachalam on 8th January 1938. These matters have been heard together and can be dealt with conveniently in one judgment.2. The testator, who was a member of the Nattukottai Chettiar community was a very wealthy man. His personal assets have been estimated to be worth Rs. 39,66,100. He had assets in British India, Burma, Federated Malay States, Ceylon and French Cochin China. In addition, he was the trustee of numerous charities, the endo...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 29 1948 (PC)

Padmalabha Panda Vs. Appalanarasamma and ors.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : AIR1952Ori143

Ray, C.J.1. The question, involved in this appeal, is whether a plaintiff can avail himself of the benefits of the doctrine of part performance of a contract for sale as against an invasion on his rights by an attaching creditor of the transferor (promisor.) He had objected to the attachment by advancing a claim in Order XXI, Rule 58, Civil Procedure Code. The claim having been rejected he brought the suit, out of which this Second Appeal arises.2. The appeal was heard 'ex parte', and the learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the appellant No. 1 obtained a decree for costs against them invite our attention to such authorities as could be cited by the respondent had he been represented before us.3. The facts, in short, are that the disputed properties belonged to defendants 2 to 12. Defendant No. 1 obtained a decree for costs against them. After decree, passed on 2-9-1936, the aforesaid defendants separated amongst themselves and the disputed properties fell to the share of defendant ...

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 25 1949 (PC)

Puro Goudo and ors. Vs. Sri Uday Pratap Singh Deo

Court : Orissa

Reported in : AIR1952Ori223

Panigrahi, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit filed by the Zamindar of Shergada Estate for delivery of possession of 39.49 acres of land in village Brahmahatya within the ambit of his zamindari and for other reliefs.2. The plaintiff's case is that the suit lands bearing survey Nos. 60, 107 and 115 are his 'hetta' or private lands and that the defendants No. 6, 7, 8 and 20 took them on lease for Fasli 1348 and entered upon the lands as his tenants, that the lease was renewed by a registered document for the subsequent Fasli, but that at the instigation of one Gobind Pradhan the defendants refused to surrender possession and claimed occupancy rights in them. The dispute between the parties led to initiation of proceedings under Section 145, Criminal P. C., and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate passed an order upholding the possession of the defendants. The plaintiff was, therefore, obliged to file the suit for declaration of his title and for a permanent injunction restraining the said de...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 20 1915 (PC)

Y.S. Venkata Subbiah Chetty Vs. A. Subba Naidu and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 31Ind.Cas.152

1. This was an action brought by a merchant in Cuddapah, called Venkata Subbiah Chetty, against two persons, who may for brevity be called the 'Naidus,' the South Indian Export Company and Heinrich Brandt. The facts giving rise to the action are as follows:The Naidus were the owners of some mica mines in Nellore. On the 17th of February 1906, they entered into an agreement, Exhibit I, with the South Indian Export Company regarding the working of the mines and disposal of the produce. The general nature of the agreement was that the Company should receive the produce of the mines and sell it, should receive a commission on the gross amounts realized by sale and certain specified disbursements incurred in connection therewith. They were further to give the owners a standing advance of Rs. 55,000, and were to receive on that sum and on any further sums they might advance, interest at 6 per cent. (Clause 5). It was provided by Clause 11 that the Company should first, pay the commission, in...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 23 1894 (PC)

Wafadar Khan and ors. Vs. Queen-empress

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : (1894)ILR21Cal955

Beverley, J.1. This appeal has been preferred on behalf of fourteen Kabulis, who have been convicted by a Jury in the Court of Session at Hooghly, of offences under Sections 148 and 325, read with Section 149 of the Penal Code, and the appeal is preferred on the ground that the verdict is vitiated by reason of misdirection by the Sessions Judge in his charge to the Jury.2. The fourteen appellants were committed to the Sessions Court upon the following charges: 'First, that you, on or about the 20th day of April 1894, at Bhadresar P. S., Serampore, committed murder by causing the death of Khan Ghalib, and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code, and within the cognisance of the Court of Session. Secondly, that you, on or about the same day and at the same place by causing death of Khan Ghalib, committed culpable homicide, and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 304/149 of the Indian Penal Code, and within the cognisance of...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 30 1912 (PC)

Shamu Patter Vs. Abdul Kadir Ravuthan and Abdul Rajak Sahib

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1912)14BOMLR1034

Ameer Ali, J.1. These are two consolidated appeals from certain judgments and decrees of the High Court of Madras, dated the 28th of January 1908, affirming the decisions of the Subordinate Judge of South Malabar at Palghat; and the sole question for determination in both cases turns upon the meaning to be attached to the word ' attested' in Section 59 of the Indian Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), the first clause of which provides that 'where the principal money secured is one hundred rupees or upwards, a mortgage can be effected only by a registered instrument signed by the mortgagor and attested by at least two witnesses.'2. The appellant Shamu Patter, as the representative of one Appu, deceased, brought a suit on the 18th of July 1902 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of South Malabar, to enforce a mortgage alleged to have been executed in favour of Appu by the Ravuthan defendants. The other defendants to Patter's action were certain attaching creditors of the Ravuthans,...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //