Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rationale Year: 1952 Page 1 of about 71 results (0.004 seconds)

Jan 07 1952 (FN)

Morissette Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-07-1952

..... . dement, 9 gill (md.), 7, 52 am.dec. 670 (1850); railroad co. v. o'donnell, 49 ohio st. 489, 32 n.e. 476 (1892). the rationale underlying such cases is that, when one clearly assumes the rights of ownership over property of another, no proof of intent to convert is necessary. it has even been held ..... very seldom able to do so." regina v. woodrow, 15 m. & w. 404, 417 (exch. 1846). convenience of the prosecution thus emerged as a rationale. in 1866, a quarry owner was held liable for the nuisance caused by his workmen dumping refuse into a river, in spite of his plea that he played ..... statute would be "obstructed" by requiring a finding of intent, if we assume that it had a purpose to convict without it. therefore, the obstruction rationale does not help us to learn the purpose of the omission by congress. and since no federal crime can exist except by force of statute, the reasoning ..... harmony with this consensus of state judicial opinion, the existence of which may have led the court to overlook the need for full exposition of their rationale in the context of federal law. in overruling a contention that there can be no conviction on an indictment which makes no charge of criminal intent ..... . waite, 11 allen 264 (1865). departures from the common law tradition, page 342 u. s. 257 mainly of these general classes, were reviewed and their rationale appraised by chief justice cooley, as follows: "i agree that as a rule there can be no crime without a criminal intent, but this is not by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 03 1952 (FN)

Perkins Vs. Benguet Consolidated Mining Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-03-1952

..... enough to bind a foreign corporation in proceedings against it to enforce an obligation arising outside of the state of the forum. that conception now has been modified by the rationale adopted in later decisions, and particularly in international shoe co. v. washington, 326 u. s. 310 . today, if an authorized representative of a foreign corporation be physically present in the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 01 1952 (HC)

Satyaprasad Ghosal Vs. Subodh Chandra

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jul-01-1952

Reported in : AIR1953Cal672

..... practical purposes to rely on the facts as presented by the parties and the receiver and if they are all agreed as to that appointment i do not see the rationale of this ritual of a sanction as laid down under new rule 12 and i do not see how in that case the court is going to decide who is .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 26 1952 (FN)

Ftc Vs. Ruberoid Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-26-1952

..... department and confided to independent tribunals. if the tribunal to which such discretion is delegated does nothing but promulgate as its own decision the generalities of its statutory charter, the rationale for placing it beyond executive control is gone. page 343 u. s. 490 iii. the quasi-legislative function of filling in blank spaces in regulatory legislation and reconciling conflicting policy .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 04 1952 (FN)

Standard Oil Co. Vs. Peck

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-04-1952

..... . co. v. virginia, 198 u. s. 299 , ohio, the state of the domicile, would have a strong claim to the whole of the tax that has been levied. but the rationale of those cases was rejected in ott v. mississippi barge line co., 336 u. s. 169 , where we held that vessels moving in interstate operations along the inland waters were .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 28 1952 (FN)

Guessefeldt Vs. Mcgrath

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-28-1952

..... techt v. hughes, 229 n.y. 222, 128 n.e. 185, so held after an exhaustive review of the authorities. it should be added that this court recently adopted the rationale of techt v. hughes, supra, in johnson v. eisentrager, 339 u. s. 763 , 339 u. s. 771 -773. nor need we look only to judicial definition of petitioner's status .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 23 1952 (HC)

Bhikari Prusti Vs. Madan Mohan Jiu Thakur and ors.

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Oct-23-1952

Reported in : AIR1953Ori73

..... and the 'marfatdari' rights to another family for the purpose of carrying on the regular worship of the idol. the transfer was held to be a valid transaction.the whole rationale of the judgment was on account if the endowment being a private one and the transfer being with the concurrence of the whole family. here, of course, it is a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 11 1952 (SC)

The State of West Bengal Vs. Anwar Ali Sarkar

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-11-1952

Reported in : AIR1952SC75; 1952CriLJ510; [1952]1SCR284

patanjali sastri, c.j.1. this is an appeal by the state of west bengal from a judgment of a full bench of the high court of judicature at calcutta quashing the conviction of the respondent by the special court established under section 3 of the west bengal special courts ordinance, 1949, (ordinance no. 3 of 1949) which was replaced in march, 1950, by the west bengal special courts act, 1950, (west bengal act x of 1950) (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'). 2. the respondent and 49 other persons were charged with various offences alleged to have been committed by them in the course of their raid as an armed gang on a certain factory known as the jessop factory at dum dum, and they were convicted and sentenced to varying terms of imprisonment by the special court to which the case was sent for trial by the governor of west bengal by a notification dated 26th january, 1950, in exercise of the powers conferred by section 5 (1) of the act. thereupon the respondent applied to the high court under article 226 of the constitution for the issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the conviction and sentence on the ground that the special court had no jurisdiction to try the case inasmuch as section 5 (1), under which it was sent to that court for trial, was unconstitutional and void under article 13(2) as it denied to the respondent the equal protection of the laws enjoined by article 14. the high court by a full bench consisting of the chief justice and four other judges quashed the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 21 1952 (HC)

Mohamad Hydar and ors. Vs. the State of Hyderabad

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-21-1952

Reported in : 1953CriLJ454

palnitkar, c.j.1. i have had the advantage of reading the judgments prepared by my learned colleagues, m.a. ansari and srinivasa chari jj., which they are about to deliver. after carefully going through both of them, i agree with the conclusion arrived at by ansari j.2. so far as the constitutional question is concerned, the three judgments of the supreme court, viz., - state of west bengal v. anwar ali : 1952crilj510 , - raning rawat v. state of saurashtra : 1952crilj805 , and - lachmandas kewalram v. state of bombay : 1952crilj1167 , declare the final word on the law as regards the validity of such special regulations. it is clear that article 14 of the constitution condemns discrimination not only by substantive law but also by law of procedure. the hyderabad special tribunals (termination) and special judges (appointment) regulation no. x of 1359 fasli, provides certain special procedure different from that laid down in the ordinary law of criminal procedure and it is to be decided how far that procedure is discriminatory.3. section 5 of that regulation empowers the chief minister to make over such of the cases as were pending before a special tribunal for trial to the special judge. the word 'offences' in section 5(1)(a) is a misnomer, for it is conceded that no specific offences were made over to the special tribunals for trial but only cases were made over and many of them were tried and decided by the various special tribunals & many more were pending before them on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 29 1952 (HC)

V.M. Syed Mohamed and Co. and anr. Vs. the State of Madras Represented ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-29-1952

Reported in : AIR1953Mad105; (1952)2MLJ598

venkatarama ayyar, j.1. these writs raise the question of the validity of the madras general sales tax act, ix of 1939, and of the turnover and assessment rules, 1939 framed thereunder hereinafter called the rules. the petitioners in writ petition no. 21 of 1952 are doing business as tanners in eluru. the course of business is that they purchase raw hides & skins & tan them in their own tannery. they hold a licence as tanners under the act, under rule 15, they were submitting monthly returns of hides and skins purchased by them for the purpose of tanning, in form no. a-4 and an order was passed on 23-2-1951 on the basis of these returns determining the tax payable at rs. 10,180-7-3.payments amounting to rs. 4,790-13-0 had been made by the petitioners towards the amount of the tax and for the balance rs. 5,389-10-3 remaining payable, a demand was duly made by notice under rule 15 (4). no appeal was taken against theorder of assessment and it has become final. norwas any action instituted to contest its validity.the tax not having been paid, the commercialtax officer instituted proceedings under section15 (b) of the act for the recovery of the amount.the section so far as it is material runs as follows :'any person who fails to pay within the timeallowed any tax assessed on him, or any feedue from him, under this act shall, on convictionby a presidency magistrate or a magistrate ofthe first class, be liable to a fine which mayextend to one thousand rupees, and in the caseof a .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //