Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1952SC214; 1952CriLJ1131; (1952)IMLJ816(SC); [1952]1SCR812
Bose, J. 1. This is simple case though it was argued at great length on behalf of the appellant and a number of technical objection to the validity of the trial taken. 2. The appellant Bhagwan Singh has been convicted of the murder of one Bunggar Singh and sentenced to death. He has also been convicted under Section 19(f) of the Indian Arms Act but we are not concerned with that here. 3. The prosecution story is that the appellant bore a grudge against the deceased because the deceased had fired at the appellant's brother some six or seven years before the person occurrence and was sent to jail for it. When he cam out of jail the police thought it prudent to take proceedings against both sides under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This resulted in the appellant's two brothers and his cousins being bound down, as also the deceased. This, it is said, constituted the motive for the present crime. 4. On the date of the occurrence the 7th of September 1950, the prosecution st...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1952SC218; [1952]1SCR645
Das, J.1. This appeal arises out of an application by five out of ten judgment-debtors made under section 8 of the U. P. Debt Redemption Act (No XIII of 1940) for ascertaining the amount due by them in accordance with the provisions of section 9 and 10 of that Act and for amending the decree passed on March 31, 1939, by the Additional Civil Judge, Banaras, in O. S. No. 33 of 1938. The facts material for the purposes of this appeal may now be briefly stated. 2. By a mortgage deed executed on June 22, 1922, Madho Ram, Sita Ram, Jai Ram and Lakshman, all sons of Pandit Raja Ram Pant Sess, mortgaged certain immovable properties in favour of Damodarji, son of Kamta Nathji, owner of the Kothi Joshi Shivanath Vishwanath for the due repayment of the sum of Rs. 8,000 advanced on that date by a cheque together with interest thereon at 12 annas per cent. per mensem with quarterly rests. On July 28, 1931, the said mortgagors and their sons executed a mortgage over the same properties in favour of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1956SC9; 1956CriLJ126
Bose, J.1. This is an appeal from a conviction for murder and a sentence of death. The appellant was tried by the Judicial Commissioner of Manipur, a Part C State to which the Criminal Procedure Code does not apply but to which the Indian Evidence Act does.2. Though the Code of Criminal Procedure does not apply to Manipur, the trial has been substantially in accordance with the procedure laid down by that Code. But as there is no appellate tribunal in the State for a case of this kind, we have heard the appeal as a Court of Ordinary appeal and have gone into the evidence.3. Two women were killed late in the night of 4th/5th August 1951. They were the wife and mother-in-law of the appellant. The two were not living in the appellant's house but in the house of the mother-in-law. There had been some estrangement between the husband and wife, and the wife was not at the time living with the appellant.4. That the women were murdered is beyond dispute. They were savagely attacked with a shar...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1952SC207; (1952)IMLJ823(SC); [1953]1SCR793
Mahajan, J.1. The dispute in this appeal concerns the zamindari and house properties owned by Shah Chiranji Lal who died at a young age on the 11th May, 1913, leaving him surviving a widow, Mst. Khem Kuer, and his mother Mst. Mohan Kuer, besides a number of collaterals, indicated in the pedigree table below :- Shah Pirthi Raj______________________________|_____________________________| | || Hira Lal Shah Jai| __________|__________________ Kisen| | || Shah Jwala Prasad Shah Sri Kishen| (1) Khem Kuer || (2) Phool Kuer Shah Madho Lal| | _________|____________| Dwarka Prasad | || Sudarshan Lal Madsudan Lal|||Mst. Tulsa Kuer = Shah Lal Chand = Mst. Mohan Kuer| |Mst. Ram Kuer = Kherpal |_________|___________________ || | | |Ram Lachman Kishen Lal |Chand Prasad = Mst. Umri |||___________________________________________|_________| | | |Ganga Jamna Mst. Prem Kuer Shah ChiranjiPrasad Prasad = Lekh Raj Lal = Mst._______|_______ Khem Kuer| |Manohar Lal Lachmi Narain2. Mst. Khem Kuer, the young wid...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1952SC205; [1952]1SCR775
Chandrasekhara Aiyar, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendants from a decree of the Patna High court reversing a decree of the Subordinate Judges Court at Patna, and decreeing the plaintiffs'suit for possession against the defendant first party who may be called for the sake of convenience as 'the Gopes'.2. The lands were khudkhasht lands, party belonging to the plaintiffs first party and party belonging to Mussammat Anaro Kuer, from whom the plaintiffs second and third parties trace title. The ancestors of plaintiffs first party gave on 28.9.1899 and ijara with possession to one Lakhandeo Singh an ancestor of the defendant second party under Exhibit I (b) for a term of six years from 1307 Fasli to 1312 Fasli for Rs. 540. The poshgi money was to be paid in one lump sum at the end of Fasli 1312. If there was no redemption then the ijara was to continue in force till the money was repaid. Mussammat Anaro Kuer gave her share in ijara to the same Lakhandeo Singh orally on 10th June, 1905, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1952SC179; (1952)ILLJ769SC; (1952)IMLJ813(SC); [1952]1SCR519
Mukherjea, J.1. This appeal is directed against a judgment of a Division Bench of the Madras High Court dated 1st April, 1949, passed in a certiorari proceedings, by which the learned Judges directed the issue of a writ of certiorari for quashing a portion of the an order made by the Labour Commissioner Madras, in any enquiry under section 51 of the Madras Shops and Establishment Act. 2. The facts material for our present purpose lie within a narrow compass and to appreciate the point that requires consideration in this appeal it will be convenient first of all to advert to a few relevant provisions of the Madras Act referred to above. The Act was passed in 1947 and its object, as stated in the preamble, is to provide for the regulation of conditions of work in shops and other establishments. Section 14 (1) of the Act sets a statutory limitation upon the working hours and lays down : 'Subject to the other provisions of the Act, no person employed in any establishment shall be required ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1952SC201; [1952]1SCR782
Mahajan, J.1. These appeals are directed against the judgment and decrees of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta, dated 23rd February, 1945, reversing the judgment and decrees passed by the District Judge of Birbhum dated 16th December, 1938. The principal questions for determination are the same in all of them and can be conveniently disposed by one judgment. 2. It is necessary to set out briefly the history of this half a century old litigation. The seven suits out of which arise Appeals Nos. 68 to 74 were filed in September, 1904, by Maharaja Bahadur Singh, in the court of the different Munsifs at Rampurhat, against Raja Ranjit Singh Bahadur, deceased, and others, for a declaration of his title to the lands mentioned in different suits and for mesne profits from the year 1899 till recovery of possession. It was alleged that the lands in the several suits were chowkidari chakran lands within the plaintiffs patnidari, granted to his predecessors in interest on 14th November, 1853...
Tag this Judgment!