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
Panna Lal and ors. Vs. Gobardhan Das
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1949All757
Agarwala, J.1. This is a defendants' appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of price of fruits of certain trees alleged to have been taken away stealthily by the defendants-appellants. The plaintiff-respondent alleged that he was a zamindar of the village, that plot No. 212 belonged to him, that the adjoining plot No. 213 was a grove of which the defendants were the grove holders, that certain trees stood in plot No. 212 and belonged to the plaintiff and that the defendants had appropriated the fruits of the trees and so were liable to pay the price to the plaintiff.2. The defence was that the trees were part of the grove standing in plot No. 213 and had been planted by the defendants and that they did not stand in plot No. 212 at all. The trial Court held that it could not be said with certainty in which plot the trees stood and that, therefore, the plaintiff had failed to prove his case. In the result it dismissed the suit. The lower appellate Court came to the conclusion that pri...
Tag this Judgment!Mohan Lal Huja and ors. Vs. Chawla Bank, Ltd.
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1949All778
Bhargava, J.1. This is an appeal by Mohan Lal Huja and some other creditors of the Chawla Bank, Ltd,, which will hereafter be referred to as the bank, against an order, dated 17th January 1949, made by a learned Judge of this Court, in exercise of the original company jurisdiction of the Court, under Rule 153, Companies Act (VII [7] of 1913).2. The Chawla Bank, Ltd., was incorporated In British India as a joint stock company, under the Indian Companies Act, in the year 1932, with its registered office at Bannu in the North-West Frontier Province. At the time of its incorporation, the share capital of the bank was Rs, 2,00,000, divided into 4,000 shares of Rs. 50 each; but in 1945 the capital was raised to Rs. 10,00,000, divided into 20,000 shares of Rs. 50 each. The paid up capital amounted to Rs 3.59,400. In course of time the bank was a flourishing concern, and was able to establish thirteen branch and pay offices at various places in the North-West Frontier Province and in the Punja...
Tag this Judgment!Rex Vs. Mohd. Etizad Rasul Khan
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1953All266
ORDER1. These contempt proceedings are closely connected with Jehangirabad Taluqa case which is being tried in the Court of the learned Civil Judge, Lucknow.2. The late Maharaja of Jehangirabad. Sir Ejaz Easul Khan died on 21-5-1947. The plaintiff Kr. Shaikh Mohammad Etizad Easul Khan is the owner of Taluqa Rasulpur in his own rights. He is also the nephew of the late Maharaja and claims to be the preferential heir to the estate of Jehangirabad as against the minor defendants Jamal Rasul and Irran Easul, who claimed to be late Taluqdar's sons from his second wife Maharani Zubeda Khatoon. The late Maharaja executed a registered deed of gift in favour of Jamal Rasul in 1944 and transferred to him thereby a number of villages of which he gave possession, and mutation in respect of which was made shortly thereafter. Later, on 1-4-1945 he bequeathed his entire movable and immovable property to the minors describing both as his legitimate sons and heirs, The will was deposited with the Distr...
Tag this Judgment!Sita Ram Vs. the Crown
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : 1950CriLJ3
Harnam Singh, J.1. Sitaram applies Under Section 435, Criminal P.C. for the revision of the order passed by Shri K. C, Grover, Magistrate 1st class, Amritsar on 2lat August 1948.2. The facts, so far as material, are that a building consisting of a temple, shops, a hall and a chaubara situate in Katra Nihal Singh Atta Mandi, Amritsar, balongs to the Panchayat Shikarpuri Biradri, hereinafter referred to as the applicant. The allegations are that the hall and the chaubara were given for three days by the applicant to Sitaram on 22nd February 1948 for use on the occasion of the marriage of his daughter. Indeed, the case states that Mela Bam made an application to the Panchayat on 20th February 1948 on behalf of Sita Ram for the reservation of the hall and the chaubara for three days between 23rd February to 25th February 1948 for use on occasion of the marriage of the daughter of Sita Earn and that the possession of the hall and the chaubara was made over to Sita Earn on 22nd February 1948...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Singh Vs. the Crown
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1950P& H25; 1950CriLJ459
ORDERFalshaw, J.1. Ram Singh alias Kundan Singh haa been convicted by the Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, Under Section 802, Penal Code, for the double murder of Diwan Bahadur Diwan Pindi Daaa Sabharwal and his wife Shrimati Parvati Devi, ancl sentenced to death. He has appealed and his eaBe is also before us for confirmation of the death sentence.2. At the outset the legal objeotion has been raised that the trial in the Court of the Sessions Judge was illegal. The grounds on which this objection is based are as follows;3. Since 20th March 19-17 the Punjab Public Safety Act, II [2] of 1947, has been in force at first in the United Punjab, and Eince the partition in the East Punjab. Section 2 (b) of this Act reads, 'dangerously disturbed area means any area declared as such by notification, by the Provincial Government, or any part thereof'. Under this provision the municipal area of Ludhiana was declared to bo a dangerously disturbed area by the Punjab Government by Notification No. 1516 dat...
Tag this Judgment!Dominion of India Vs. Hiralal Bothra
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1950Cal12
R.P. Mookerjee, J.1. The decree-holder opposite party obtained a decree on 15th May 1947, from the Court of Munsif, Jamalpur, within the district of Mymensingh, against 'The Governor-General of India in Council, New Delhi and B. A. Railway, having its Head Office at 3 Koilaghat Street, Calcutta.' The nature of particulars of the claim on which the decree was passed cannot be ascertained from the records. On 8th December 1947, the decree-holder applied to the Court of Munsif, Jamalpur, under Order 21 Rule 6, Civil P. C., for a certificate of non-satisfaction, A certificate was issued accordingly and a copy o! the order was, as applied for by the decree, holder, directed by the Munsif at Jamalpur to be sent to the Registrar, Court of Small Causes, Calcutta with a copy of the decree. This order was passed in Money Execution Case No. 86 of 1947. On 13th March 1948, the decree-holder opposite party filed in the Court of Small Causes, Calcutta, an application for execution of the decree so t...
Tag this Judgment!Naresh Chandra Bose Vs. Bhupendra Narayan Sinha
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1950Cal15,54CWN243
K.C. Chunder, J.1. These are three appeals arising out of three execution proceedings of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Murshidabad. In two of them, there was an appeal to the District Judge who modified the order in execution of the Subordinate Judge and there are two second appeals against the District Judge's decision. The third is the First Miscellaneous Appeal against the order of the Subordinate Judge. The Raja Bahadur of Nashipur is the owner of a Touzi No. 1152/1. There is a patni under it of which the appellant Naresh Chandra Basu has a ten annas interest while the remaining six annas belong to the Maitras. Under the patni, the Raja Bahadur has another jote. The jote fell into arrears of rent. Rent suit No. 7 of 1933 was filed for arrears of rents from 1336 to 1339 B. S. This was decreed and an appeal was taken up to the High Court which upheld the decree on 28th May 1940. In the meantime Rent Execution case No. 42 of 1939 had been filed and the jote in arrears was sold...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Sammad Vs. Jitoo Chowdhury
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1950Cal20,54CWN149
Lahiri, J.1. The suit out of which this appeal arises was instituted by the plaintiff for ejectment of the defendant from cadastral survey plot No. 633 of Khatian 587 Mouza Garulia on termination of the defendant's tenancy by a notice to quit under Section 106, T. P. Act. The Court of appeal below dismissed the suit and hence this appeal is by the plaintiff.2. The plaintiff's case is that he took a lease of 9 cottas of land under a patta dated 19th POUS 1308 (3rd January 1902) from his two uncles Sk. Osman and Sk. Meajan and out of this area of 9 cottas the plaintiff granted a sublease to the defendant for three cottas for residential purposes; in the record of rights finally published in 1931 the defendant was recorded as an under-raiyat with a right of occupancy. This entry was challenged by the plaintiff as wrong. The plaintiff further alleged that he served a notice to quit under Section 106, T. P. Act, on 21st Jaistha 1342, by registered post and the defendant accepted the same wi...
Tag this Judgment!Chairman of the District Board Vs. Bagala Kumar Chatterjee
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 1950CriLJ33
Harries, C.J.1. This is a reference made by the learned Sessions Judge of Hooghly recommending that a certain order of acquittal be set aside and that a criminal case be sent back to a learned Magistrate for trial according to law.2. The case for the prosacution wag that the opposite party, Bagala Kumar Chatterjee, held a Bishahari Jhapan Mela, at Debipur on 21st August 1947 without any licence from the petitioner, the Hooghly District Board, as required by 8. 100A, Bengal Local Self-Government Act of 18S5. It is said that by holding the mela the opposite party committed an offence punishable Under Section 100D of that Act.3. The opposite party contended that he did not hold the said mela or fair at Debipur as alleged by the petitioner and the case was in due course tried by Sri P. Naskar, a Magistrate of the First Class at Chinsurah. Ha did not go into the merits of the case, but he acquitted the opposite party boldiug that the District Board were not era powered by law to issue Iicen...
Tag this Judgment!Madan Singh Vs. Hukmi and anr.
Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1949HP26
Bannerji, J.C.1. This is an appeal from a judgment and decree of the Chief Judicial Officer, Simla Hill States, dated 5th August 1948, affirming, a judgment and decree of the District Judge, Koti State, dated 17th March 1948, and thereby, to all intents and purposes, decreeing the suit.2. The plaintiff (who is respondent in this appeal) claimed in his suit a declaration that as a reversionary heir to the last male-holder of the property comprised in the deed of gift executed on 23th May 1941, by the donors, Mat. Karmi and Mt. Malti, widows of one Motia, alienating the property in favour of the defen-dant (appellant in this appeal), He further claimed that the said deed of gift be declared invalid and inoperative and not binding on him.3. His case was, that on the death of Tulsia, the property was inherited by Parsa and Motia separately. On the death of Motia, his two widows, Mt. Malti and Mt. Karmi, took possession of the estate as limited owners. Parsa dying issueless, his widow, Mt. ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 6713
- 6714
- 6715
- 6716
- 6717
- 6719
- 6720
- 6721
- 6722
- 6723
- Next ›
- Last »