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
Necharuddi Safui Vs. Ayod Ali and anr.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1951Cal319
K.C. Chunder, J.1. This is an appeal against an appellate decree of the Subordinate Judge, 1st Court Alipore, affirming the decision of the Munsif, second Court, Diamond Harbour, The facts are not disputed.2. The decree-holder appellant obtained a decree for contribution separately against the contesting respondent judgment-debtor l and also the judgment-debtor 2. The decree was not a joint decree. The judgment-debtor l had made a deposit in Court but the deposit was short by Rs. 4 and odd because of not depositing the costs decreed. The property of judgment-debtor l, as also that of judgment-debtor 2 who had made no deposit whatsoever and from whom the entire contribution money payable by him was due, were put up for sale and the property of judgment-debtor 1 was sold for Rupees 40. Rupees 4-8-3 were due from judgment-debtor l after the deposit made by him. The decree-holder was to have deposited Rs. 8 and odd as 25 per cent, of the purchase money even after giving a set off for the a...
Tag this Judgment!Majeed Khan Mohammad Yaseen Khan and anr. Vs. Rex
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1950CriLJ61
Mustaq Ahmad, J.1. On the facts found by the learned Sessions Judge is this case, and having regard to a for other circumstances which I shall notice, the conviction of the appellants Majid Khan and Bundu Khan was, in my opinion, almost impossible. They were convicted each under Section 4(b), Explosive Substances Act (vi [6] of 1908) and sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment by the learned Sessions Judge of Meerut, and they appeal against the same.2. The case, arose in the following manner. On 13th June 1947, at 10-30 P.M., one Dwarka Prasad lodged a report at the police station Baghpat to the following effect:In the mosque of mohalla Eangran, Bagbpat town there were three violent explosions. The reports were very loud and caused piano throughout the town. When I went to the scene I found the mosque smothered with smoke and the smell of gun powder prevailing all round. People were coming out of the mosque with articles. There were previous complaints of the collection of aroma...
Tag this Judgment!Bechey Lal Vs. the State
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1952All667
ORDERDesai, J. 1. This is an application in revision by Bechey Lal, patwari, against his conviction and sentence under Section 161, Penal Code by a Judicial Magistrate first class, confirmed on appeal by the Additional Sessions Judge of Bahraich. 2. Plot no. 2893 was in the possession of Salik Dhobi as bila tasfiya tenant for three years when Mathura took a patta of it from the zemindar. Subsequently there was a consolidation of holdings in the village in the course of which the plots were re-distributed among the tenants.Plot No. 2893 was given in this scheme to another man and in exchange plots Nos. 875 and 876 were given to Salik. There could be two claimants for these two plots, namely Salik on the basis of his actual possession over plot No. 2893 and Mathura, on the basis of his patta. If plots Nos. 875 and 876 were to be given to the person holding a patta for the plot, Mathura was entitled to them. But they were given to Salik. These facts were within the knowledge of the applic...
Tag this Judgment!Osma Mistry and anr. Vs. Atul Krishna Ghosh and anr.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 1950CriLJ97
ORDERSen, J.1. This rule has been obtained by two persons who have been convicted of having com. mitted theft by the learned Magistrate, Sri S. C. Mukherjee, exercising first class powers at Diamond Harbour. On appeal the Additional Sessions Judge, 24 Parganas, upheld the order of the learned Magistrate with respect to the two -petitioners. Six persons were tried by the Magistrate and convicted. Four of these six were acquitted by the lower appellate Court. The sentence passed on the petitioners consists of a fine of RSection 100 each, in default rigorous imprisonment for a period of four months.2. Having regard to the order which I am about to pass it will not be necessary to state the facts in full. The case was argued with commendable fairness on both sides. Mr. Mukherjee appearing to oppose the Rule was of great assistance to this Court in determining the questions of law involved. The facts briefly are these : There is a plot of land which is being claimed on the one hand by Atul ...
Tag this Judgment!Tobarak Mondal Vs. the King
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 1950CriLJ157
Harries, C. J.1. This is an appeal by one Tobarak Mandal who was tried by a learned Sessions Judge and a jury upon a charge Under Section 366, Penal Code. The jury returned a unanimous verdict of guilty of an offence under that section and the learned Sessions Judge accepted the verdict, convicted the appellant and sentenced him to a term of five years' rigorous imprisonment. From that conviction and sentence the present t )peal has been preferred. The charge was that Tobarak Mandal had abducted a young married woman named Mentu Daaai the daughter of the complainant Jatil Mehna, from the house of Jatil Mehna in village Hariramput;.2. It appears that on Ashar 15 last Mentu Dasai was staying at the houae of her father and at about Candle-light time she went out to a tank called Bodipukur which was not far from the house of the complainant to ease herself, There it is suggested that she was abducted by the appellant with intent that she should be compelled to marry him against her will or...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Protap Kayan Vs. the National Petroleum Co. Ltd.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1950Cal23,54CWN58
P.N. Mitra, J.1. The suit out of which this appeal arises was commenced by the respondent, the National Petroleum Co. Ltd. against the appellant Ram Protap Kayan for ejectment of the latter from a corrugated sheet shed and godown forming part of premises No. P-2 Paharpur Siding Road of the Port Commissioners of Calcutta in King George's Dock. There was also a claim for damages for wrongful occupation which was provisionally laid at Rs. 9400, The respondent's case was that its predecessor-in interest the National Petroleum Company (hereinafter referred to as the company) entered into business relationship with the appellant, the terms whereof were set out in an instrument of agreement executed by both the parties on 31st March 1981, that one of the terms of the said agreement was that the company would provide for the appellant a suitable shed and godown at a monthly rent of Rs. 60 in which the appellant would fit up his tin manufacturing machines and of which he would remain in occupat...
Tag this Judgment!Gadadhar Dey Vs. Sm. Rani Bala Dasi and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1950Cal109
R.P. Mookerjee, J.1. This appeal is on behalf of the plaintiff in a suit for recovery of Rs. 25 as compensation for cutting a way and appropriating a mango tree by the defendant. The plaintiff's case is that the defendant is a non-permanent thika tenant who has only the right to enjoy the fruits of trees that may be on the land but she has no right to cut away any trees even those grown by her. The defendant had removed a mango tree and the plaintiff had accordingly filed this suit for the recovery of Rs. 25 as compensation.2. The defendant admits that she had cut and appropriated the mango tree planted by her predecessor-in-interest and she contends that she has a right to do so under the law.3. The plaintiff's witness having admitted that the defendant and her predecessors had been in possession of the disputed land for over 100 years, the mango tree in question was held by the learned Munsiff, to have been planted by the defendant's predecessor--a case as made by the defendant. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Raghunath Ganesh Thakar Vs. Vaman Vasudev Chitale
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1950Bom234; (1950)52BOMLR135
ORDERShah, J.1. This is a revisional application against the order of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Poona, directing the plaintiff to pay the necessary court-fee on a plaint which was transferred to his Court under orders of this Court. The plaintiff filed suit No. 1920 of 1946 on the Original Side of this Court against the defendant, who is the opponent before me. The defendant filed is the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Poona, suit No. 820 of 1943 against the petitioner-plaintiff for a certain declaration and injunction. The defendant applied to this Court by application, being Civil Application No. 324 of 1947, for an order transfering the suit on the Original Side of this Court to the Poona Civil Judge's Court with a direction that that suit be heard with suit No. 820 of 1946. This Court by its order dated 27th November 1947, directed as follows:'We therefore make the rule absolute and direct that Suit No. 1920 of 1946 pending on the Original, Side of this Court be...
Tag this Judgment!S. Raghbir Singh Vs. the Crown
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : 1950CriLJ149
Kapur, J.1. This is a petition for reinstatement by Baghbir Singh who had been dismissed from practice as a pleader on 7th July I9il, by a Full Bench of the Lahore High Court.2. Baghbir Singh was, after passing his LL. B. examination, enrolled as a Pleader on 81st of July 1923 and his ordinary place of business was to be at Montgomery. The record shows that he was practicing at Amrita in 1928 and en 9th September 1928, one Bhagat Singh made a complaint against him that he had received ESection 170/ from Mm fraudulently. As in the meanwhile Raghubir Singh bad left Amritsar and started practice at Pakpattan, The matter was sent for report to the District Judge, Montgomery at Lahore. Another complaint by one Nibal Chand was also made against Kaghbir Singh charging him with cheating him (Nihal Chand) by depriving him of a certain amount of money. This matter was sent to the District Judge, Amritsar, who made a report disbelieving the statement of Baghbir Singh and held that a prima facie c...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: the Newspaper The Daily Pratap an Urdu Daily of New Delhi
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1950P& H150; 1950CriLJ725
Achhru Ram, J.1. This is a petition Under Section 23, Press (Emergency Powers) Act. The petitioner before us is K. Narendra, Printer and Publisher of the Urdu newspaper 'The Daily Pratap' of New Delhi. The petitioner was ordered to deposit a security of Bs. 6000 Under Section 9 (1), Press Aot and the amount was depoaited by the petitioner on and June 1948. By his Order No. F-8 11/48 Press, dated 10th December 1948, Mr, Shankar Parshad, Chief Commissioner of Delhi, forfeited the amount of the security because certain articles and news items published in a number of issues of the Daily Pratap came within the mischief of 8. 4 (i), Press Act. The offending material was printed in seven different issues of the newspaper. Of these five are news items and two are editorial comments. It was alleged that the subject-matter of these articles and news items fell within Clauses (b), (d) and (h) of Section 4 (1), Press Act. The petitioner's application is directed against the order of forfeiture pa...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 6720
- 6721
- 6722
- 6723
- 6724
- 6726
- 6727
- 6728
- 6729
- 6730
- Next ›
- Last »