Kolkata Court April 1940 Judgments
Bholanath Dutta Vs. Sm. Narayan Kumari Dassi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-1940
Reported in: AIR1940Cal588
Mohamad Akram, J.1. These five analogous appeals by the plaintiff, namely, Second Appeals Nos. 416 to 420 of 1938 arise out of five suits instituted for the recovery of 8 annas share of rents, cesses and damages on the allegation that there existed five separate tenancies bearing respectively the jamas of Rs. 22-8-0, Rs. 49-12-0 odd gandas, Rs. 19-11-0 odd gandas, Rs. 5-6-17 1/2 gandas and Rs. 17-4-0 odd gandas. The Second Appeals Nos. 417, 418 and 420 of 1938 together with the suits out of which they arose were withdrawn at the time of the hearing, so that it is now the remaining appeals only, that is, Second Appeals Nos. 416 and 419 of 1938, arising respectively out of suits Nos. 3033 and 3062 of 1936 with which I am concerned. In the Court of the trial the defence taken regarding these suits was that the original jamas of Rs. 22-80 and Rs. 5-6-17 1/2 gandas claimed by the plaintiff had long ceased to exist, m these jamas were consolidated with the 'jamas of certain other lands in th...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Girish Chandra Ghose and ors. Vs. Sudhir Chandra Ray Choudhuri
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-1940
Reported in: AIR1941Cal133
ORDERMcNair, J.1. This is an application by three voters in Ward No. 3 of the Calcutta Municipality for an order that the election of Sudhir Chandra Ray Choudhuri as a councillor for Ward No. 3 be declared null and void and that such election be set aside, and for costs. One of the petitioners, Dr. Ghose, was a candidate at this election. Ward No. 3 is Bartola, a general constituency which elects two councillors and one of the seats is reserved for a member of the scheduled castes. The five candidates polled votes as follows : The respondent Sudhir Chandra Ray Choudhuri 1945, Jogendra Nath Mandal who is a member of a scheduled caste 1039, Radha Nath Das, also a member of a scheduled caste 717, Dr. Girish Chandra Ghose 589 and Mr. Haridat Saha 418.2. The election is called in question on the ground of a corrupt practice within the meaning of Schedule 2, Part 1, Calcutta Municipal Act. It is alleged in the petition that amongst voters on the electoral roll was one Chunilal Bhattacharjee,...
Tag this Judgment!Chimanlal Rameswarlal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-1940
Reported in: AIR1941Cal142
Derbyshire, C.J.1. I am of the opinion that the losses here claimed are losses of the old business. They were losses incurred because of dealings of the old firm and not of the new firm. For that reason they are not properly allowable against the income, profits and gains of the new firm. It has been contended that these are assets taken over from the old firm by the new firm. They are debts, and in so far as they have a value that value when received may become part of the capital of the new firm for earning purposes. Until then they are assets of doubtful value. In so far as smaller sums of nominal debts are realised, it seems to me that losses so sustained are losses of capital and not trading losses. In my opinion this rule must be discharged with costs, the hearing-fee being assessed at three gold mohurs.Nasim Ali, J.2. I agree....
Tag this Judgment!Mohini Mohan Majumdar and anr. Vs. Maharaja Bir Bikram Kishore Manikya ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-1940
Reported in: AIR1941Cal257
R.C. Mitter, J.1. Defendant 1, Mohini Mohan Majumdar, was the plaintiff's law agent for looking after his cases at Kasba. He was appointed as agent by an order of the plaintiff's father dated 15th December 1909. He actually joined his office on 15th January 1910. On 12th March 1911, the plaintiff's father gave him an ammokternama for the purpose of enabling him to discharge the duties of his office. On 28th May 1911, he executed his service kabuliat in favour of the plaintiff's father and had it registered. The service kabuliat is printed at p. 13 of Book c. It is unnecessary to recite here all the terms of the service kabuliat. It is only necessary for this appeal to notice the following conditions of service: (a) he was to look after suits and executions and to withdraw the moneys deposited in Court on account of the decrees passed in favour of his employer; (b) not to spend a single cowrie out of the sums that he withdrew from Court on account of these decrees; (c) he was to send ev...
Tag this Judgment!Sreemati Kamala Bala Dasi, in Re.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-1940
Reported in: [1940]8ITR404(Cal)
NASIM ALI, J. - This is a reference under Section 66 (2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, XI of 1922.The assessee is the widow of one Upendra Nath Sadhukhan who with his younger brother Bepin Behari Sadhukhan formed an undivided Hindu family. Upendra died intestate on December 23, 1917 leaving the assessee as his sole heiress under the Hindu law. Thereafter difference arose between her and her brother-in-law, Bepin Behari, as regards the joint properties.In May 1923 the assessee left her husbands house in Calcutta and went to live at Howrah with her maternal uncle. On October 10, 1923, by a deed of relinquishment she surrendered her life estate in favour of her brother-in-law, Bepin in consideration of a payment by Bepin by way of maintenance of Rs. 1,000 per month.The question is whether on these facts the sum of Rs. 12,000 which the assessee receives by way of maintenance every year can be said to have been so received by her as a member of the Hindu undivided family within the meaning ...
Tag this Judgment!Chimanlal Rameswarlal Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bengal.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-1940
Reported in: [1940]8ITR408(Cal)
DERBYSHIRE, C. J. - I am of the opinion that the losses here claimed are losses of the old business. They were losses incurred because of dealings of the old firm and not of the new firm. For that reason they are not properly allowable against the income, profits and gains of the new firm.It has been contended that these are assets taken over from the old firm by the new firm. They are debts, and in so far as they have a value that value when received may become part of the capital of the new firm for earning purposes. Until then they are assets of doubtful value. In so far as smaller sums of nominal debts are realised, it seems to me that losses so sustained are losses of capital and not trading losses.In my opinion this rule must be discharged with costs, the hearing fee being assessed at three gold mohurs.NASIM ALI, J. - I agree.Rule discharged....
Tag this Judgment!Mohamed HossaIn Vs. Md. Raffique and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-29-1940
Reported in: AIR1941Cal130
ORDERMcNair, J.1. The petitioner in this application was a candidate from the Mahomedan constituency of Colootolla No. 8 for which there are two seats. The petitioner's nomination was rejected by the returning officer and three other candidates who are made parties to this petition withdrew their candidature, and in the result Mohamed Raffique and Dr. Sayed Zaffar Ahmad were declared elected and their names were published in the Calcutta Gazette. The petitioner contends that the result of the election has been materially affected by the improper rejection of his nomination papers and/or by reason of irregularity in respect of the nomination papers and/or by non-compliance with the provisions of the Act. These submissions which appear in his petition are based on Sections 46 and 47, Calcutta Municipal Act, as amended. Two questions arise on this petition : first, as to the validity of the nomination papers which were rejected and secondly, whether the returning officer's decision can be...
Tag this Judgment!East Bengal Bank Ltd. Vs. Jogesh Chandra Banerjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-29-1940
Reported in: AIR1941Cal127
ORDERR.C. Mitter, J.1. The petitioner before me is the East Bengal Bank Ltd. (hereinafter called the Bank), a company registered under the Companies Act. The said Bank filed a suit in the Court of the Small Cause for the recovery of Rs. 408 from the defendant opposite party on the basis of a promissory note executed by the latter in its favour. The suit was filed on the basis of a vakalatnama executed by the local agent of the Bank on its behalf. The plaint was also verified by the said local agent. On 28th July 1939, a joint petition was filed on behalf of the Bank and by the defendant asking the Court to refer the matter to arbitration. The petition was signed by the legal agent of the Bank but it was approved of by the pleader engaged by the Bank and was moved by him in Court. On the said petition, an order was passed by the learned Small Cause Court Judge referring the dispute to the named arbitrators. The arbitrators filed their award in Court on 3rd August 1939 and in accordance ...
Tag this Judgment!Latifannessa Bibi Vs. Sk. Nanu
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-26-1940
Reported in: AIR1940Cal398
Bartley, J.1. This is a reference under Section 438, Criminal P.C., made by the learned Sessions Judge of Hooghly. The facts are that one Latifannessa filed an application under Section 488, Criminal P.C., against her husband Shaik Nanu for the maintenance of herself and her children. The order with regard to the younger child was:The child is to have Rs. 3 per month for its own maintenance until it attains puberty. The parties consent to this.2. The petitioner was divorced and has married again and the maintenance for the child was not paid. She then applied to the successor of the Magistrate who made the order for its execution. The Magistrate then recorded an order to the effect that as it appeared to him to be improper for a Magistrate to embody the terms of a compromise in an order under Section 488, Criminal P.C., that order could not be enforced. He therefore refused to issue a warrant and referred the petitioner to the Civil Court. The learned Judge is of opinion that this orde...
Tag this Judgment!Pyari Mohan Manjhi and anr. Vs. Moulvi Hashan Ali Khan Armanali Khan a ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-25-1940
Reported in: AIR1941Cal251
ORDERHenderson, J.1. This rule has been obtained by the judgment-debtors and arises out of rent execution case No. 405 of 1939. During the course of the proceedings the petitioners applied to a Debt Settlement Board and a notice under Section 34, Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act, reached the Court on 21st July 1939. The Munsif disregarded it and the proceedings went on. A sale was held on 10th August in spite of the protests of the petitioners and the property was purchased by opposite parties 3 to 7. Petitioners then filed the application which has given rise to this rule. It was dismissed. The sale was eventually confirmed on 23rd September and, as the price fetched was greater than the demand, the execution case was dismissed on full satisfaction. The ease of the petitioners is extremely simple. Their contention is that the Munsif acted without jurisdiction in ignoring the notice from the Debt Settlement Board and that the sale held was a nullity. But difficulty arises as to the proc...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »