Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC23; 1953(1)BLJR70; (1953)IMLJ100(SC); [1953]4SCR136
Mahajan, J.1. These are two cross-appeals from the decision of the High Court at Calcutta in its appellate jurisdiction dated 17th February, 1947, modifying the order of the Subordinate Judge of Howrah in Title Execution Case No. 68 of 1936. 2. The litigation culminating in these appeals commenced about thirty years ago. In the year 1923, one Durga Prasad Chamria instituted a suit against the respondents, Radha Kissen Chamria, Motilal Chamria and their mother Anardevi Sethani (since deceased) for specific performance of an agreement for sale of an immoveable property in Howrah claiming a sum of Rs. 11,03,063-8-3 and other reliefs. The suit was eventually decreed on compromise on the 19th April, 1926. Under the compromise decree the plaintiff became entitled to a sum of Rs. 8,61,000 from the respondents with interest at 6 3/4 per cent. with yearly rests from the date fixed for payment till realization. Part of the decretal sum was payable on the execution of the solenama and the rest by...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC21; 1953(1)BLJR61; (1953)IMLJ97(SC); [1953]4SCR119
Bhagwati, J.1. The plaintiff filed O.P. No. 15 of 1945 in the Court of the District Judge of Anantapur for setting aside an award on the ground inter alia of legal misconduct of the arbitrator. The trial Court set aside the award. The High Court on appeal reversed the judgment of the trial Court and dismissed the plaintiff's suit. This appeal has been filed by the plaintiff with the certificate of the High Court against that decision. 2. One P. Narayanappa died in 1927 leaving him surviving the plaintiff his widow, the defendant 1 his undivided brother, the defendant 2 a son of his another pre-deceased brother, and defendant 3 his son by his pre-deceased wife. The deceased had purported to make a will dated 1st May, 1927, under which he had made certain provision for her maintenance and residence. The plaintiff stayed with the family for some time but had to leave the family house owing to disputes which arose between her and the senior wife of defendant 1. She lived with her mother fo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1952SC369; [1953]4SCR1
Patanjali Sastri, C.J.1. This is an application under article 32 of the Constitution for relief in respect of an alleged infringement of the fundamental right of the petitioners under article 19(1)(g) or, alternatively, under article 136 for special leave to appeal from a judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta rejecting their application for the same relief under article 226. 2. As the petitioners would clearly be entitled to relief under the one or the other form of remedy if their claim was well-founded, no objection was taken to the maintainability of the present proceeding, and we desire to guard ourselves against being taken to have decided that a proceeding under article 32 would lie after an application under article 226 for the same relief on the same facts had been rejected after due enquiry by a High court. We express no opinion on that point. 3. The facts leading to this proceeding are not in dispute and may be briefly stated. The first petitioner is an Advocat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1953SC33; [1953]4SCR154
Mahajan, J.1. These two connected appeals from the judgment and decree of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta in appeal from Original Decree No. 43 of 1942 dated the 6th May, 1946, arise out of Title Suit No. 63 of 1938, instituted on the 21st September, 1938, in the Court of the Second Additional Subordinate Judge of Alipore, by Rajlakshmi against the Sens and the Dasses for possession of the properties which represent a four anna share of the estate once held by one Raj Ballav Seal. 2. On the 8th June, 1870, two days before his death, Raj Ballav Seal, a Hindu inhabitant of the town of Calcutta governed by the Bengal School of Hindu law, executed a will giving authority to his widow Mati Dassi to adopt a son and appointed her and three other persons as executors and trustees of the estate and gave them elaborate directions for the administration and distribution of his extensive properties. Raj Ballav was one of those persons who believe in leaving detailed instructions about the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1952SC409; [1953]4SCR752
Chandrasekhara Aiyar J.1. These appeals are connected and raise a common question of law. They come before us on special leave granted by the Pepsu High Court at Patiala under sub-clause (c) of clause (1) of article 133 of the Constitution. 2. The facts in Civil Appeal No. 152 of 1951 are different from those in the other two appeals, and the consequences are different also. 3. The proceedings arise out of the liquidation of two companies called the Marwari Chamber of Commerce Ltd., (in Civil Appeal No. 152 of 1951) and the Aggarwal Chamber of Commerce Ltd., (in the other two appeals). The Official Liquidator settled the list of contributories, and after various steps taken before the Liquidation Judge of the High Court by way of objection on grounds of law as well as on merits, there were payment orders on 4th June, 1946, in Civil Appeal No. 152 of 1951 and on 18th January, 1949, in the latter two appeals. 4. The correctness and the validity of the payment order in Civil Appeal No. 15...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1952SC405; 1953CriLJ163; (1953)IMLJ17(SC); [1953]4SCR126
Chandrasekhara Aiyar, J. 1. Rameshwar Bhartia, the appellant, is a shopkeeper in Assam. He was prosecuted for storing paddy without a licence in excess of the quantity permitted by the Assam Food Grains Control Order, 1947. He admitted storage and possession of 550 maunds of paddy, but pleaded that he did not know that any licence was necessary. The Additional District Magistrate recorded a plea of guilty, but imposed on him a fine of Rs. 50 only, as he considered his ignorance of the provisions of the Food Grains Control Order to be genuine. The stock of paddy was left in the possession of the appellant by the Procurement Inspector under a Jimmanama or security bond executed in his favour. He was subsequently unable to produce it before the court, as the whole of it was taken away by a Congress M.L.A. for affording relief to those who suffered in the earthquake, and so, the appellant was ordered to procure a similar quantity of paddy after taking an appropriate licence, and to make ov...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1952SC401; 1953(1)BLJR1; (1953)IMLJ12(SC); [1953]4SCR108
Bhagwati, J.1. The question that arises for our consideration in this appeal is whether prior to the enactment of section 65-A of the Transfer of Property Act in 1929 a mortgagor in possession had the power to grant a permanent lease of the mortgaged property so as to bind the mortgagee. 2. One Raja Nilkanth Narain Singh was the owner of Gadi Sirampur and he executed on the 1st August, 1914, a simple mortgage of Gadi Sirampur in favour of the Chota Nagpur Banking Association Limited. In 1920 the Bank filed a suit against his son Wazir Narain Singh to enforce the mortgage security and obtained a mortgage decree on the 29th November, 1921. The Bank purchased a third share of Gadi Sirampur in execution of that decree on the 28th October, 1922. Proceedings were taken to set aside this sale. During the pendency of these proceedings it appears that on the 5th November, 1925, Wazir Narain Singh granted a permanent lease of four villages Nawadih, Koldih, Pandna and Chihutia by a registered Pat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1952SC358; 1953(1)BLJR25; (1953)IMLJ6(SC); [1952]1SCR1133
Bhagwati, J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment and decree of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad which set aside a decree passed by the Civil Judge of Azamgarh decreeing the plaintiff's claim. 2. One Haji Abdur Rahman, hereinafter referred to as 'Haji' a Sunni Mohammedan, died on the 26th January, 1940, leaving behind him to a large estate. He left him surviving the plaintiffs 1 to 3, his sons, plaintiff 4 his daughter and plaintiff 5 his wife, defendant 6 his sister, defendant 7 his daughter, by a predeceased wife Batul Bibi and defendants 1 to 4 his nephews and defendant 5 his grant-nephew. Plaintiffs case is that immediately after his death the defendant 1 who was the Chairman, Town Area qasba Mubarakpur and a member of the District Board, Azamgarh and defendant 5 who was an old associate of his started propaganda against them, that they set afloat a rumour to the effect that the plaintiffs 1 to 4 were not the legitimate children of Haji and that the plaintiff 5 was not hi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1952SC354; 1953(1)BLJR30; 1953CriLJ154; [1953]4SCR94
Mahajan, J. 1. Palvinder Kaur, was tried for offences under section 302 and 201, Indian Penal Code, in connection with the murder of her husband, Jaspal Singh. She was convicted by the Sessions Judge under section 302 and sentenced to transportation for life. No. verdict was recorded regarding the charge under section 201, Indian Penal Code. On appeal to the High Court she was acquitted of the charge of murder, but was convicted under section 201, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment. Her appeal by special leave is now before us. 2. Jaspal Singh, deceased, was the son of the Chief of Bhareli (Punjab). He was married to Palvinder Kaur a few years ago and they had two children. The husband and wife were living together in Bhareli house, Ambala. It is said that Jaspal's relations with his father and grandfather, were not very cordial and the two elders thought that Palvinder Kaur was responsible for this. It is also said that Jaspal lived on the allowance...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1952SC362; [1952]1SCR1122
Bhagwati, J.1. This is an appeal by the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff against the decree of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad allowing the appeal of the defendants against the decree passed by the Court of the Civil Judge of Shahjahanpur in favour of the plaintiff allowing the plaintiff's claim in part. 2. One Kailashi Nath Kapoor, the plaintiff, was employed by the District Board of Shahjahanpur, the defendants, as their Secretary in the year 1924. He was also entrusted in 1929 with the additional duties of doing assessment work for the defendants. The work done by the plaintiff did not find favour with some members of the Board and on the 9th November, 1939, six members of the Board tabled a resolution asking the Chairman to convene a special meeting of the Board to consider a resolution for the dismissal of the plaintiff. A special meeting of the Board was convened on the 17th December, 1939. Twelve charges were framed against the plaintiff and he...
Tag this Judgment!