Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.81 seconds)
Chandrama Rai And Ors. vs Harbans Rai And Ors. on 8 July, 1964 cites

Bholanath Dhar And Ors. vs Gour Gopal on 24 July, 1953

It has been contended in Bholanath's case, AIR 1953 Cal 777 that Sri S. L. Banerji, Magistrate 1st class, had no jurisdiction to try the case decided by him under Section 145 as the case had not been validly transferred to him. It appears that the Subdivisional Magistrate had taken cognizance of this case, and it was urged that he alone was competent to transfer the case to another Magistrate for disposal, and it was argued that the transfer made to Sri S.L. Banerji by Sri A. B. Mukherji was invalid, Sri A. B. Mukherji on the relevant date was the subdivisional Magistrate, having taken over from the Subdivisional Magistrate, who had taken cognizance of the case. It was argued in the Calcutta High Court, that upon an interpretation of Section 559(1) of the Code, it did not authorise Sri Mukherji to transfer the case of which cognizance had been taken by his predecessor. Reliance was placed on the expression occurring in Section 192(1) that the sub-divisional Magistrate may transfer any case of which he has taken cognizance. This argument was repelled by the Calcutta High Court upon an interpretation of Section 559(1). It was stated that the interpretation that a successor subdivisional magistrate cannot deal with a matter under Section 192 of which he had not taken cognizance, would make Section 559(1) altogether infructuous.
Calcutta High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 7 - Full Document
1   2 Next