Privy Council Cases
Colonial & appellate judgments
Browse Privy Council & House of Lords decisions
Search appeals from Indian High Courts decided by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and related appellate benches - foundational authority for constitutional and commercial law.
Colonial & appellate
Latest Privy Council judgments
Bholaprosad Lala Vs. the King
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 1949CriLJ590
Harries, C.J.1. this is a petition for revision of an order made by & learned Additional Presidency Magistrate convicting the petitioner of an offence under Section 7(l), Essential Supplies Act and sentencing him to pay a fine of Rs. 2C0 and in default of payment, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. Certain articles which were seized were ordered to be forfeited.2. There can be no doubt that the petitioner was on 30th August 1943, in charge of a hand-cart on which were loaded two bales of yarn and 10 bundles of yarn. He was stopped by a Sub-Inspector of the Enforcement Branch whiter crossing the Howrah Bridge. The hand oart was searched and the goods were found in it, The petitioner was in due course sent for trial and was charged under the Essential Supplies Act for moving cloth or yarn from the Calcutta District to the Howrah District without a permit issued by the Director under the West Bengal' Cotton Cloth and Yam Movements Control Order, dated 19th December 1947, mad...
Tag this Judgment!Mt. Sukhdei and ors. Vs. B. Himanshudhar Singh and ors.
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1949All609
Kidwai, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit instituted by Babu Himanshudhar Singh, taluqdar of Shahmau Tekari, for recovery of arrears of under-proprietary rent from the appellants and respondents 2 to 5. The appellants are the mortgagors of the under-proprietary khata in respect of which the arrears are claimed and respondents 2 to 5 who are in possession of the whole khata on behalf of the appellants are usufructuary mortgagees. The plaintiff is the superior proprietor.2. The defence was that a certain sum, namely Rs. 200 had been paid towards the arrears claimed and that remission had been granted on account of frist which should also be deducted from the amount of rent claimed in the suit. The suit was filed as long ago as 1937 but it has been considerably delayed owing to the fact that there were two remands to ascertain whether there had been remissions on account of frost or not. Finally the Civil Judge of Partabgarh held that although there had been remissions, the appellants...
Tag this Judgment!Brij Behari Lal Vs. Mt. Amirunnissa and ors.
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1949All615
ORDERKidwai, J.1. On 7th August 1912, Chaudhri Husain Ahmad mortgaged a 4-pies share in mahal Amirunnisa, village Bangarmau, in the district of Unnao to the applicant in lieu of a sum of Rs. 1000 at 9 per cent. per annum. Interest on this deed was paid regularly but the principal sum due under the loan remained outstanding and on 16th February 1929, a fresh mortgage deed was executed by Chaudhri Husain Ahmad in respect of the same sum of Rs. 1,000. The interest stipulated in the new deed was also 9 per cent. per annum.2. Chaudhri Husain Ahmad died leaving the opposite parties 1 to 3 as his heirs. The said opposite parties applied under Section 12, U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act alleging that the entire mortgage debt had been satisfied. They claimed the benefit of Section 9, Debt Redemption Act. The trial Court calculated the amount due on the mortgage deed allowing interest at the rate of 41/2 per cent. per annum and it found that nothing remained due. It accordingly allowed redemptio...
Tag this Judgment!Gainda Lal Sharma Vs. Bishamber Nath Kumar
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : 1949CriLJ573
Harnam Singh, J.1. Biebambar Nath made an application under Section 145, Criminal P. C, in the Court of the Resident Magistrate, New Delhi, on 8i8t July 1948, complaining that he bad been forcibly and wrongfully dispossessed of the premises known as 'Express Motor Garage' situate in M. Block, Connaught Circus, Delhi, by Pandit Gainda Mai respondent. Paragraphs 3 and 4. of the application run:(3) That according to the terms of the agreement between the parties all the accounts of the said shop were to be, and have been, operated solely by the petitioner who has been in possession of the said shop with its yard and the business carriad on there.(4) That on 26th June 1948 the petitioner's son along with a Chowkidar was sitting in the shop premises when the respondent with several others came there and dragged them out and forcibly put his own look on the premises, The petitioner wished to take action for his forcible dispossession but the respondent induced him to stay his hands on the as...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Chelliah Alias Mariappa Kudumban
Court : Chennai
Reported in : 1949CriLJ896
Panchapakesa Ayyar, J.1. The accused, a be y past 16, has been convicted under Section 302, Penal Code, by the Sessions Judge of Ramnad, and sentenced to transportation for life with the recommendation for action under B. 10-A, be cstal Schools Act.2. The facts are simple. The accused and the deceased a neighbouring be y of 12, were friends, though, like boys of that age, they were also now and then quarrelling. On 26th March 1948, the accused called the deceased to go with him to collect some babul beans which he bad taken on lease for a rupee. The two boys went together, the accused taking with him athorothi stick (a stick with a small iron bill hook at the end) for plucking the beans. They were seen together gaily chatting and laughing and proceeding to--warjjs the babul tree by P. v. 7, the accused's Stepmother. That night, the deceased did not return home, so his relatives went about enquiring for him. Finally, the accused was questioned. At first he said that the deceased had gon...
Tag this Judgment!K. Muhammad Sukri Sahib Vs. thelapurath Madhava Kurup and anr.
Court : Chennai
Reported in : 79Ind.Cas.1011; (1924)46MLJ560; (1949)1MLJ376
Horwill, J.1. The respondent is the owner of a shop in Calicut town and the appellant is his tenant, holding the shop on a month-to-month tenancy. The respondent filed O.S. No. 405 of 1943 for the eviction of the appellant; but before he could obtain a decree, the Non-Residential Building Rent Control Order, 1942, had been amended on nth July, 1944. Apparently unaware of the amendment, a, decree was passed in the respondent's favour on the 8th September, 1944. Almost immediately, the respondent applied for possession, obtained an ex parte order in his favour, and was actually put in possession on the 15th September, 1944. On the 28ih October, 1944, the appellant drew the attention of the executing Court to the amendment on the nth July, 1944, and pointed out that the Court had acted ultra vires, in that its order delivering possession to the respondent was void. The Court then took action under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure and set aside its previous order on the ground th...
Tag this Judgment!G. Rengaraja Rao Vs. A. Tulasibai Ammal
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1949)1MLJ650
Panchapagesa Sastri, J.1. This is an appeal against the order of the Subordinate Judge of Cuddalore directing the issue of a succession certificate to the respondent Tulasi Bai. She is the daughter of one Venkobai Ammal who is said to have executed a will dated 9th March, 1944, bequeathing all her properties to her daughter. The appellant who is the step-son of Venkobai opposed the application to the grant of succession certificate. His objections were firstly that succession certificate could not be issued by reason of Section 370 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (XXXIX of 1925); secondly that the Subordinate Court had no jurisdiction as the deceased was residing at the time of her death within the district of Chittoor where she is said to have executed the will and where she died; and thirdly that the will was not true and valid. All his contentions were overruled. Hence the appeal by him to this Court.2. A preliminary objection is taken by the responden's advocate that the appeal ...
Tag this Judgment!Suprintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs Vs. P. Sen and anr.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 1950CriLJ144
Harries, C. J.1. This is an appeal on behalf of the Provincial Government from an order made by a learned Magistrate of the first class, Howrah, acquitting the respondents upon a charge Under Section 60(a)(iii), Factories Act.2. Respondent 1. P. Sen, wa3 the occupier and respondent 2, A. T, Sen, was the manager of a registered factory (regigfcered No. 316) styled Sen & Co., situated at No. 3 Kuchil Sarkar Lane, Howrah. On 16th September 1947, Sri S. K, Sinha, Inspector of Factories, inspected this factory and found moving parts of the machinery not securely fenced or guarded as required by Section 24(i)(c), Factories Act, read with n, 24(1), Bengal Factories Rules. In particular the back and change gears of lathes, toothed gears of the boring mills, oblique belts driving the blowers, and Emery wheel were not securely fenced.3. On 9th February 1948, the Inspector, Sri S. E. Sinha, himself filed a complaint in the Court of the District Magistrate, Howrah, against both respondents Under S...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammad Zahural Huque Vs. State
Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1950MP17; 1950CriLJ731
Sanghi, J.1. The petitioner came to Indore from West Pakistan on 4th September 1948, under a permit issued by the Deputy High Commissioner for India in West Pakistan under Ordinance No. 17 of 1948 made by the Governor-General of India Under Section 42, Government of India Act, 1935. In the permit the duration of the visit to India is stated to be for a period of six weeks. The applicant, sot having left Indore on the expiry of the six weeks, was arrested on 6th November 1948, by the Sub-Inspector of Police in charge Sadar Bazar Police Station House in the city of Indore for having contravened the provisions of Section 8 of the Ordinance. On the following day, he was produced before the District Magistrate, Indore City who ordered his release on bail. The District Magistrate is awaiting the police challan. On 9th December 1948, the petitioner made a petition to this Court Under Section 491, Criminal P.C. alleging that his arrest was illegal and that bis bail should be cancelled. He alle...
Tag this Judgment!Darbara Singh and ors. Vs. the Crown
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : 1950CriLJ167
Harnam Singh, J1. The six appellants in this case have been convicted Under Section 399, Penal Code and sentenced to undergo five years' rigorous imprisonment each.2. The prosecution case is that on the evening of 7th April 1048, Pandit Narinjan Singh, Assistant Sub Inspector, Panipat, received in-formation that a group of six persons would commit dacoity that night at the house of Rafci Bam lambardar of Dimana, police station Samalkha, a fairly wealthy person, and that the dacoits would collect at a well in the area of village Bheri Nan gal alias Garhi Siwah, situate at a distance of about two miles from Panipat, On receipt of this information at about 7 or 7-30 p, M. the Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police deputed Banwari Lai police constable to go to village Dimana, situate at a distance of four fees from Panipat to inform Eati Ram lambardar of the proposed dacoity and at about 10 P.M. formed a raiding party consisting of Assistant Sub-Inspector Chaudhri Harbans Lai P.W. 4, Hari Earn ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 6658
- 6659
- 6660
- 6661
- 6662
- 6664
- 6665
- 6666
- 6667
- 6668
- Next ›
- Last »