Privy Council Cases

Nagendra Nath Bhowmik and ors. Vs. the King

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : 1950CriLJ1

Harries, C.J.1. This is an appeal by six persons who were convicted of an offence under Section 395 (2), Calcutta Municipal Act, and each sentenced to pay a fine of RSection 1000 and in default of payment each was directed to undergo simple imprisonment for five months Under Section 395 (2)/488.2. The six accused persons are shebaita of a deity. It appears that all six were minora and proceedings seem to have been taken against them through their mother as a kind of guardian ad litem. There is nothing on the record to show what the age of these six persona were, but it i8 unnecessary to conaider whether they could or could notice be guilty of any criminal offence because the appeal can be disposed of on other grounds.3. The section creating the offence of which they were convicted is Section 395 (a), Calcutta Municipal Act, which is in these terms :No person shall establish a new private market for the sale of, or for the purpose of exposing for sale, animals intended for human food, o...

Sri Popsing Rice Mill Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bihar and OrissA ...

Court : Orissa

Reported in : AIR1949Ori53; [1949]17ITR420(Orissa)

RAY, C.J. - This arises out of an application made to this Court, under sub-section (3) of Section 66, Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, complaining against the correctness of the Appellate Tribunal decision dated November 9, 1948, that the assessee application, under Section 66(1), to the Tribunal to refer a question of law said to arise out of its order dated November 19, 1947, was time-barred by 3 days, and that the Tribunal has no powers to condone the delay. The circumstances in which the case arises are as follows :-The assessee was served with notice of an order under sub-section (4) of Section 33 of the Act on December 4, 1947. He having intended to require the Appellate Tribunal to refer to the High Court a question of law arising out of such order within 60-days of the date of service of the notice of the order made a deposit of Rs. 100 in the Cuttack Treasury on February 2, 1948, being 60th day from the date of such service, by Chalan No. 7; that very day he had sent an applicati...

Ram Kumar Vs. P.C. Roy and Co. (India) Ltd.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1952Cal335

Chatterjee, J.1. This is a suit for the recovery of Rs. 32,500/- being damages for breach of contract.2. A gentleman by the name of Hazarimull Agarwalla carried on business in' the name & style of Sree Jagadish Rice & Oil Mills at Forbesgunge in the district of Purnea in Bihar. He was the karta & manager of a joint Hindu family which carried on business in that name.3. The case made in the plaint is that it was agreed that Hazarimull Agarwalla would sell & the deft, would purchase 2,500 maunds of rice on inter-alia the following terms & conditions: (a) The deft, would pay the price of rice at 28/-per maund. (b) The deft, would pay also two annas per maund, as expenses for cartages & loading, (c) The deft, would pay Rs. 62/- per hundred new bags, (d) Delivery would be given at the plff's. mill.(2) It is alleged in the plaint that the deft, postponed taking delivery of the goods to which the plff. assented. On 20-9-1943 the plff. called upon the deft, to take delivery of the goods vithin...

Bengal Jute Mills Co., Ltd., Calcutta Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, ...

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : [1949]17ITR308(Cal)

HARRIES, C.J. - This is a reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, made by the Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench, in which the following question is propounded for the opinion of this Court :-'Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the income in question, viz., Rs. 2,000, was rightly treated as the income form business for excess profits tax purposes ?'The facts giving rise to this litigation may be shortly stated as follows : The assessees are a limited liability company carrying on business as manufacturers of jute products. The assessees had let a portion of their business premises to a firm known as Radha Kant & Co. who were conducting the business of dehydrating potatoes. The assessees claimed that the rent payable by Radha Kant & Co. had not been fixed and that there was a dispute concerning it. Hence their return did not show any rent received in respect of this letting. The Income-tax Officer did not accept this contention and estimated the income...

Madholal Sindhu Vs. the Official Assignee of Bombay

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1949)51BOMLR906

Harilal Kania, Kt., C.J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment of a division bench of the High Court at Bombay setting aside a decree of a single Judge of that Court. The material facts are these :-2. By January 1940 Mr. Meyer Nissim (hereafter referred to as Nissim), defendant No. 4, had borrowed from defendant No. 2 bank Rs. 75,000 on the security of 26,000 shares of the first defendant company and passed two letters of hypothecation in the same terms in favour of the bank. The letter of hypothecation provided that all securities which may from time to time be held by the bank of Nissim's account shall be security for repayment of the outstanding general balance of all and every loan or account of his with the bank, including interest. It further provided as follows :-' With power to you (the bank) at your discretion to sell or a sufficient portion of such securities in the event of my not maintaining a margin of 40 per cent, on the market value of the securities for the time being or ...

JainaraIn Ram Lundia Vs. Surajmull Sagarmull

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1949)51BOMLR979

Mukherjea, J.1. This appeal is directed against an appellate judgment of the Calcutta High Court, dated June 18, 1946, affirming with slight variation, the decision of a single Judge of the Original Side of that Court, dated August 14, 1944.The suit, out of which this appeal arises, was one for specific performance of a contract for sale of certain shares in a private limited company, together with fractional interest in a partnership business, and it was commenced by two plaintiffs, who are respondents Nos. 1 and 2 in this appeal, against four defendants, two of whom, viz., defendants Nos. '5 and 4, figure as appellants before us. Of the other two defendants, defendant No. 2 is not a party to this appeal at all, inasmuch as the suit against him was withdrawn and dismissed in the trial Court and his name was struck off from the list of defendants altogether. As regards defendant No. 1, though he was retained as a party, the plaintiff's gave up their claim against him before the hearing...

Mt. Kulsumunnisa Vs. Rex and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1949All623; 1949CriLJ949

ORDERBhargava, J.1. This application in revision has been filed by Mt. Kulsumunnisa against an order, dated 20th August 1948, made by the Sessions Judge of Agra, affirming an order, dated 6th May 1948, passed by a Magistrate of the First Glass at Agra, in a proceeding under Section 145, Criminal P.C.2. On 16th June 1945, Mushtaq Ahmad made an application to the Magistrate that there was a dispute likely to cause a breach of the peace. In this application Nabi Uddin, Ghaffar Khan, Akhtar Husain and Ashfaq Husain were arrayed as opposite party. The application was sent to the police for enquiry and report; and on receipt of the police report and on being satisfied about the existence of a dispute of the nature alleged the Magistrate made an order, under Sub-section (1) of Section 145 of the Code, calling upon the parties concerned to file written statements of their respective claims with regard to actual possession of the subject in dispute.3. It is not disputed that the order was duly ...

Ori and ors. Vs. Rex

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1952All453

Kidwai, J. 1. Eight person, 1 ori, 2 Chokhey, 3Ishwar Din, 4 Brij Lal, 5 Moti, 6 Bhailal, 7Bipat and 8 Har Bhajan were convicted by theCivil and Sessions Judge of Lucknow for offencesunder sections 147, 325/149 and 323/149, Penal Code.Under sections 147 they were sentenced to two years'rigorous imprisonment each, under section 325/149 tothree years' rigorous imprisonment and undersections 323/149 to one years rigorous imprisonmenteach; the sentences were to run concurrently.They come up in appeal.2. The prosecution story as sought to be establishedat the trial was that on the 21st of May1947, at about 8in the morning while Dhanpathis son Ram Nath and Dhanpat's grove to irrigate theRampal went to Dhanpat's grove to irrigate thetrees, 18 persons, including the present eightappellants, attacked them. Ram Nath ran awayand informed his uncle Mahabir and other membersof the family. Thereupon Mahabir, his sonBabu Lal, his wife Ram Piari and Dhanpat'swife Ram Dulari all reached to the help of ...

Rahmat Ullah and ors. Vs. Maqsood Ahmad and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1952All640

P.L. Bhargava, J.1. This is an appeal by Rahmatullah & his three sons, who were defts. in a suit, instituted by the plffs.-respondents, Maqsood Ahmad & his two sisters, to recover possession over a house, which admittedly be. longed to Mohammad Yaqub, son of Seadat by his wife Mt. Qadri. It is not disputed that the plaintiffs are the children of Mohammd Yaqub's own sister. They claimed title to the house in suit as heirs of Mohammad Yaqub & alleged that the defts. were in wrongful possession thereof. The defence set up by Rahmatullah (deft. 1) was that he was the own brother of Mohammad Yaqub, being the son of Seadat & Mt Qadri, & thus he had inherited the houses as an heir under the Mohammedan Law. The case of Rahmat-ullah's sons (defts. 2 to 4) was that they were owners in possession of the house, under a will executed by Mohammad Yaqub. The plffs. denied that Rahmatullah was the son of Saadat A challenged the will set up by his sons.2. The learned Munsif of Meerut, who tried the sui...

Wilsons and Clyde Coal Co. Vs. Scottish Insurance Corporation

Court : House of Lords

VISCOUNT MAUGHAM.-The facts in this case are sufficiently stated in the speech of my noble and learned friend Lord Simonds which I have had the advantage of studying in print, and I see no benefit to be gained by repeating them. I also agree with the conclusions which he has reached, and, if I think it is desirable to express my own opinion on the construction of the articles of association so far as they bear on the question whether the proposed reduction of capital is fair and equitable as between the ordinary shareholders and the preference shareholders, it is because there has been a difference of opinion in the First Division of the Court of Session and your Lordships have listened to the citation of a large number of authorities which are thought to bear upon the matter in debate. I should perhaps add that I have arrived at my conclusion by somewhat different considerations from those upon which Lord Simonds prefers to lay stress. I will begin by treating the matter as if s...