Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1953Cal636,57CWN692
Das, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant and is directed against a judgment of Chunder J., dated 28-3-1952.2. The facts are that In September, 1949, the plaintiffs respondents initiated proceedings under Section 41 of the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act alleging that they required the disputed premises for their own use. The proceedings were numbered as Suit No, 10455 of 1949. The suit was decreed on contest by Mr. B.P. Bakshi, learned Judge, 4th Bench, his decision being dated 28-8-1949. Against that judgment an appeal was taken by the defendant to the Special Bench. The Special Bench dismissed the appeal on 23-3-1951. Thereafter the defendant filed a petition purporting to be under Section 115, Civil P. C. and Article 227 of theConstitution. A Rule was issued being Civil Rule No. 1437 of 1951. The Rule came up for hearing before Chunder J. who by his judgment dated 28-3-1952, discharged the Rule. Before the learned Judge two points appear to have been raised, namely, (1) whethe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1951Cal346,55CWN297
Harries, C.J.1. This is a petn. filed under Article 226, Const. Ind. praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari or mandamus in respect of an order of requisition made by the Dist. Mag. of Malda.2. I would state at the outset that a writ of certiorari is not appropriate, but that this is a case in which the Ct. can be asked to issue a mandamus if the facts are established as suggested.3. The petnr. is a pleader who resided in a house No. 34, Bundh Road, English Bazar, Malda. He was a tenant of one Sri Tarapada Das who was a police officer in the employ of the East Bengal Govt. Apparently, he had been in the service of the old province of Bengal and on partition he elected to serve under Govt. of East Bengal which is of course a part of Pakistan.4. In Oct. 1948, Tarapada Das came to reside at Malda and lived in a house which he rented. He eventually applied to the Dist. Mag. who requisitioned a part of the house, of which the petnr. was tenant. The order requisitioning a part of the p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 1996CriLJ590
ORDERS. Narayan, J.1. This revisional petition has been taken out by the accused of G. R. Case No. 1047 of 1981 arising out of Raipur, P. S. Case No. 15 dated 24-9-81 registered for the offence under Section 409 of the I.P.C. and has been directed against an order dated 8-2-93, whereby the prayer under Section 167(5) of the Cr. P. C. for stopping further investigation in the case and for the discharge of the accused/ petitioner was rejected.2. The main thrust of the instant case revision is based on the provision of law laid down under subsection (5) of Section 167 of the Cr. P. C. as amended by Section 4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1988. The amendment as made under Section 167(5) of the Cr. P. C. enjoins upon the Magistrate that in a case like the present one, which has been registered for the offence under Section 409 of the I.P.C., if the Investigation is not concluded within a period of two years from the date on which the accused was arrested or ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 2006CriLJ1025
G.C. De, J.1. This appeal by the convict Sanatan alias Sona Layek is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 5-6-1998 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 5th Court, Midnapore in S.T. Case No. XLIX/ July/97 arising out of G.R. Case No. 1967/ 88. By the said judgment the convict was found guilty under Section 396 of I.P.C. convicted him thereunder and was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- i.d. to undergo R.I. for six months. By the said judgment other three accused persons, namely 1) Anil Patra alias Methra, 2) Diban alias Manu Mandi and Zebra Ari alias Gour Bera were found not guilty to the charge under Section 396 of I.P.C. and accordingly all of them were acquitted under Section 235(2), Cr. P.C.2. Prosecution case in brief is that four persons, namely, Ramkrishna Ponda, Ratikanta Adhikary, Bimal Das and Rampada Sau while returning to their village home at Pasang from Radhamohanpur Railway Statio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR2005Cal145,2005(2)CHN575
Asok Kumar Ganguly, J.1. This appeal has been filed from an order dated 2nd April, 2004 passed by the learned Judge of the First Court whereby the learned Judge disposed of all the three interlocutory applications being G.A. No. 4512 of 2002 dated 25th July, 2002, G.A. No. 3462 of 2002 dated 28th August, 2002 and G.A. No. 4513 of 2002 dated 8th October, 2002. While disposing of those applications, the learned Judge ultimately directed the respondents to restore the condition of plaintiffs' roof-top cooling towers and the western side ground floor of the suit premises as was existing on the date of institution of the suit within three weeks from date. The defendants were also restrained from interfering, in any manner, with the plaintiffs' properties in the suit premises including the properties, conditions whereof were directed to be restored in terms of the injunction order. The learned Judge also directed that the said interim order shall remain in force till the disposal of the suit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR2004Cal106,(2004)1CALLT362(HC),2004(2)CHN142
A.K. Banerjee, J.1. For the purpose of communication in the year 1898 Indian Post Office Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act') came into force. Under the provisions of the said act the Postal Authority is to act as a media for the purpose of communicating between the individuals as well as various organisations under the said Act for despatch of postal articles. The addressor is to affix postage for such particular article the rate of which is to be fixed from time to time by the Union of India by virtue of Parliamentary enactment. By the said Act the Government was empowered to frame rules under the said Act. Accordingly, rules framed which are called as Indian Post Office Rules (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Rules'). Subsequently, the postal authority framed a guideline being called as 'Post Office Code' which was time to time amended.2. Under the post office guidelines any bulk consumer under the Indian Post Office Act has been given an opportunity to use a franking...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1957Cal33
Chakravartti, C.J.1. This is a reference under Section 21(1), Chartered Accountants Act with respect to a complaint against one Mr. A. K. Joscelyne, who is a partner of Messrs. Lovelock and Lewes, a firm of Chartered Accountants of Calcutta. The Council's finding against him is that in certifying a Profit and Loss Account of a company, called the Deccan Sugar and Abkhari Co., Ltd.. for the year ending on 31-12-1946, as correct and prepared in accordance with law, he has been guilty of misconduct of the varieties mentioned under items (o) and (p) of the Schedule to the Act.2. It appears that from 1946 to 1952, Messrs. Lovelock and Lewes were appointed auditors of the Deccan Sugar and Abhkari Co., Ltd., in each successive year; The work was handled in different years by different partners of the firm. The Managing Agents of the company were another company, called Parry and Co., Ltd. At the time the Indian Companies Act was amended in 1936. the Managing Agents were already holding their ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1975Cal80,78CWN1045
Sankar Prasad Mitra, C.J. 1. In this reference the facts are that on the 5th January, 1965, Title Suit No. 83 of 1959 in the Subordinate Judge's Court at Alipore for the recovery of money due on a mortgage bond was decreed. The decree-holder thereafter started execution proceedings being Title Execution Case No. 2 of 1965. On August 4. 1965, the petitioner's first bid was not accepted. Two days later the petitioner's bid was accepted and the sale took place. The opposite party No. 1 on the 4th September, 1965, filed an application under Order 21, Rule 90 of the Code of Civil Procedure in the First Court of Subordinate Judge at Alipore which was registered as Miscellaneous Case No. 51 of 1965. This Miscellaneous Case was dismissed for default on the 7th May, 1966 and the sale was confirmed on the 10th May, 1966. Theopposite party No. 1 filed an application on May 17, 1966, under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for reversing the order of dismissal for default made on the 7th M...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1961Cal125,65CWN213
P.B. Mukharji, J.1. We are unanimous that the Rule in this case must be discharged.2. This is a petition by the Union of Cycle Carts Workers known as 'Paschim Banga Malbahi Cycle Mazdoor Union 'for a writ of Mandamus against the Commissioner of Police under Article 226 of the Constitution, for directing him not to give effort to or to withdraw or cancel his notifications dated the 12th February, 1959 under Section 61A of the Calcutta Police Act 1866 and Section 38A of the Calcutta Suburban Police Act 1866. It also claims for writs of certiorari and prohibition. There is a similar application with the title Bijon Krishna Mukherji v. Commissioner of Police raising the very same questions. Both these applications have been referred to this Special Bench of this Court for their disposal and for determination of the points raised. The parties and counsel in both these matters agree that they may be disposed of by one judgment.3. The impugned notification dated 12-3-1959 under Section 61A(1)...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 2006(2)CHN448
Arun Kumar Bhattacharya, J.1. The hearing stems from twin applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C. being C.R.R. No. 1344/95 and C.R.R. No. 1673/95 filed by the petitioners Asraful Hoda and Kamal Kishore Chaddha respectively praying for quashing the proceeding of Case No. C-333/81 under Sections 135A, 132 and 135(1)(a) of the Customs Act, 1962, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, 24-Parganas (South), Alipore.2. O.P. No. 1 filed a complaint in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, 24-Parganas (South), Alipore, inter alia, alleging that one Kamal Kishore Chaddha (petitioner of C.R.R. No. 1673/95) in collusion with his associates Bijoy Kumar Mishra, partner of M/s. Crown Enterprise and Exporting Firm, Nand Kishore Agarwalla, Mangal Chand Bhandari, Asraful Hoda (petitioner of C.R.R. No. 1344/95), Aravinda Chaddha and others hatched up a conspiracy in the early part of 1980 to smuggle out huge quantity of snake skins from India through Road Line Customs Station...
Tag this Judgment!