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
Based Sheikh Vs. the King
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1950Cal331
1. This is an appeal by one Based Sheik who has been convicted of dacoity under Section 395, Penal Code, on a majority verdict of 4 to 1 and has been sentenced to four years' rigorous imprisonment.2. The evidence against the accused may be briefly summarised as follows: There were two eye-witnesses who identified him; they had also previously identified him at a test identification parade. There was some evidence of association with his co-accused both before and after the occurrence and there was evidence of a confession made by the accused Based.3. The learned Sessions Judge has not properly dealt 'with the last piece of evidence, namely, the confession. He admitted the confession as evidence on the ground that he had accepted it as admissible as having been properly recorded by a Magistrate who had stated that he was satisfied that the confession was made voluntarily. The accused made a statement alleging torture by the police to extort the confession and there was some evidence of ...
Tag this Judgment!Judhisthir Chandra Adak and anr. Vs. P.R. Mukherjee and anr.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1950Cal577,54CWN222
ORDERWhereas an industrial dispute arose between Messrs. Atlas Works Ltd., of 119-A Ripon St., Calcutta and their workmen represented by the Bengal General Engineering and Metal Factory Workers Union, 14 Motisil St., Calcutta and on a reference of the said dispute to a Tribunal, an award was made thereon by the said Tribunal which was published, in the Calcutta Gazette dated 8-6-1948 under Order No. 1680 Lab dated 25-5-1948.And whereas on a representation made by the said Messrs. Atlas Works Ltd. of 119-A Ripon Street, Calcutta, the Provincial Government considers that there have been material changes in the circumstances on which the said award was based.And whereas it is expedient that the said award should be referred to a Tribunal constituted under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.Now, therefore, in exercise of the power conferred by the proviso to Sub-section (3) of 19 of the said Act, the Governor is pleased to appoint Sri P.B. Mukerjee, Additional District Judge, to be the Trib...
Tag this Judgment!T.A. Menon Vs. the King
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1950)52BOMLR463
Reid, J.1. In 1934 the appellant was appointed to the Indian Civil Service. During 1943 he was employed as Additional District Magistrate at Midnapore, and while so employed he was concerned in the investigation of a charge of bribery against Dr. Panda, a sub assistant surgeon of the Bengal Nagpur Railway. While the case against Dr. Panda was still under investigation, the appellant was transferred from Midnapore and he went to Calcutta where he stayed for a time. It was alleged that on December 20, 1943, while in Calcutta he received a bribe from Dr. Panda and he was suspended. On July 6, 1945, the following order was made by the Governor of Bengal:In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1)(b) and Sub-section (2) of Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Act V of 1898) the Governor is pleased to accord sanction to the prosecution, of Mr. T.A. Menon of the Indian Civil Service under suspension in respect of(a) an offence under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code.(b...
Tag this Judgment!Sanmukhsing Vs. the King
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1950)52BOMLR465
Simonds, J.1. Their Lordships, having at the conclusion of the hearing intimated that they would humbly advise His Majesty to dismiss this appeal, now give their reasons.2. This is an appeal by special leave from an order of the Chief Court of Sind, in its appellate criminal jurisdiction, dated July 18, 1945, which summarily dismissed the appeal of the appellants from the conviction and sentences passed on them on March 24, 1945, by a Judge of the said Court, exercising Sessions Court jurisdiction, who, in accordance with the majority verdict of a jury, found (1) both of them guilty of being parties to a criminal conspiracy to cheat one Rochiram Asoomal Canser (Section 120B read with Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code) : (2) the first appellant guilty of having, in pursuance of the said conspiracy, forged two documents (referred to in the record as exs. A and B) purporting to be an agreement in duplicate executed at Lahore by a fictitious person called Dr. S.C. Rao, described therein...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Chander Vs. Rex
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1950All386
Desai, J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment of the Sessions Judge of Agra convicting the appellant under Section 20, Arms Act and sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment for two years.2. The appellant arrived at Agra Cantonment Railway Station by train on 26-6-1948 at about 3 P. M. Two Excise peons, Sughar Singh and Tilak Singh were on duty at the station checking suspicious luggage of passengers. Sughar Singh noticed the appellant with a hand-bag walking through the crowds. His suspicion was excited and he stopped him on the platform and asked him what the bag contained. It was a canvass bag and locked The appellant stated at first that there was nothing in it and later that there was a pistol or something dangerous in it, Sughar Singh asked for the key which he refused to give at first. He was threatened and then he took out a ring containing two keys, one of which opened the lock. Inside the bag there was a pistol. The appellant could produce no licence, Sughar Singh prepared a se...
Tag this Judgment!Hanuman and anr. Vs. Raj.
Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1951Raj131
ORDERGupta, J.1. This is a reference made by the District Magistrate, Cehuru, who has recommended that the proceedings taken by the First Class Magistrate Rajgarh, being without jurisdiction be questioned by this Court. The facts relevant for the present purpose are stated as below :2. On 14-1-1949 a report of theft was made to the Railway Police Rajgarh, who after making necessary enquiry, challaned one Naurang under Section 320, Penal Code, in the Court of the Additional District Magistrate, who transferred the case to the file of Tehsildar at Rajgarh. On 9-2-1949, as a result of further investigations while the Tehsildar was trying it, the case against Naurang was withdrawn. On 16-2-1949, the Police put up another challan based on the same report, against one Hanuman & his brother Rupa. It may be mentioned here that Hanuman had been produced as a prosecution witness in the challan against Naurang. This latter challan was not put up either before the Additional District Magistrate be...
Tag this Judgment!Ammalu Alias Pachiammal Vs. Govindu Pillai and anr.
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad609
Raghava Rao, J.1. In this second appeal, the short question for decision is whether in the absence of a sale certificate the title to the suit property vested in the plaintiff's vendor. The sale was in execution of an award obtained by a co-operative society against defendant 1. Having purchased the property, the society sold it to the plaintiff, who has instituted this suit in ejectment. The defence is that for want of a sale certificate no title ever accrued to the society which could accordingly pass none to the plain-tiff. 2. The decisions against the appellant relied on by the Courts below are Velan v. Kumarasami, 11 Mad. 296 and Jagannath v. Baldeo, 5 ALL. 305 : 1883 A. W. N. 48, which it is contended by his learned counsel are cases of sales under the Code of Civil Procedure which are inapplicable to a sale under the Co-operative Societies Act. It is further contended by him that Rule 10, Sub-rule (5) of the rules framed under the Act enjoins the issue of a sale certificate whic...
Tag this Judgment!Ummadi Bala Venkata Reddi and ors. Vs. Kanala Narayana Reddi and ors.
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad630
Balakrishna Ayyar, J.1. This is an appeal from an order of the District Judge of Cuddappah allowing an application by two creditors of an insolvent to set aside the sale held on 18th February 1944 by the Official Receiver of certain properties of the insolvent. 2. The appeal was filed without the leave either of the District Court, Cuddappah, or of this Court; and the preliminary objection has been taken that this appeal is not therefore competent. This objection is sound. Section 75(2) and (3), Provincial Insolvency Act, provide for appeals from two classes of orders, namely, those falling within Schedule 1 of the Act and those falling outside that schedule. In respect of orders falling under Schedule I an appeal lies as a matter of right. In respect of other orders the party has not an unqualified right of appeal; he has to obtain the leave either of the District Court or of this Court. In the present case admittedly no such leave has been obtained. An attempt was made to argue that ...
Tag this Judgment!Pacha Alias Naran Naskar and ors. Vs. the King
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1950Cal246,54CWN181
Harries, C.J.1. This is a petition for revision of an order of a learned Magistrate whereby he declined to hold that certain proceedings were void ab initio.2. A complaint was made to a learned Magistrate by one Khagendra Nath Haldar alleging that the present petitioner had set fire to a stack of straw on 18th December 1948, and that they were guilty of offences under the Penal Code. It is clear from the order sheet that the Magistrate took no action at all except to send the complaint to the Officer-in-charge of the Mandirbazar Police Station for taking cognizance. In fact that is the allegation made in para. 2 of the petition.3. The Police investigated and eventually framed a charge sheet and the case proceeded in Court based on the charge sheet. Later it was suggested that the whole of the proceedings were void ab initio because the Magistrate had acted wrongly and reliance was placed on a number of authorities including a very recent authority of this Court to which I am a party.4....
Tag this Judgment!Lalmohan Singh Vs. the King
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1950Cal339
ORDERHarries, C.J.1. This is a petition for revision of an order of the learned Chief Presidency Magistrate convicting the petitioner of an offence under Section 500, Penal Code, and sentencing him to pay a fine of Rs. 200 and in default of payment of the fine, to simple imprisonment for one month.2. The charge arose out of a letter which the petitioner wrote to the Editor of the Newspaper Swaraj, for the purpose of publication. To understand the allegations in the letter it will be necessary shortly to set out the facts of the case.3. The complainant was the owner of a certain premises No. 24, Hyat Khan Lane, Calcutta. It appears that one Amar Guha had somehow obtained possession of part of these premises, but it is common ground that later he was treated as a tenant. Amar Guha was an evacuee from East Bengal. Later, one Sitanath with the assistance of Amar Guha came into these premises and took possession of part of them, but it is clear from the findings of the learned Magistrate th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 6779
- 6780
- 6781
- 6782
- 6783
- 6785
- 6786
- 6787
- 6788
- 6789
- Next ›
- Last »