Kolkata Court November 1944 Judgments
Gobinda Chandra Roy and on His Death Nirmal Chandra Roy and ors. Vs. J ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-29-1944
Reported in: AIR1945Cal325
Henderson, J.1. These appeals are by the judgment-debtor. The question involved is whether the decree should be executed under the provisions of chap. 14, Ben. Ten. Act or the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code. On an application by the cosharers of the appellant under Section 88, Ben. Ten. Act, the rent was distributed although the lands were not partitioned. The objection taken by the appellant is that the effect of such distribution is to make the decrees money decrees with the result that they can only be executed as such. As a result of the distribution made the appellant has become the sole tenant of the decree, holder. It would be impossible to implead the representatives of the other two-third share of the original tenancy. It would be rather strange if the law made it impossible for the landlord in such circumstances to obtain a rent decree. 2. Two arguments were advanced in support of the appeals: (1) that there cannot be a tenure comprising an undivided interest in the l...
Tag this Judgment!Bibhuti Bhusan Roy Vs. Bholanath Singha Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-24-1944
Reported in: AIR1945Cal326
B.K. Mukherjea, J.1. This rule is directed against an order of the Munsif at Ranaghat, dated 11th November 1943, by which he stayed a mortgage suit, pending before him, on receipt of a notice under Section 34, Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act. The facts lie within a short compass and are uncontroverted. The petitioner advanced a sum of us. 475 to the opposite parties on the basis of a mortgage bond executed by the latter in his favour. On 15th July 1939, the opposite parties presented an application under Section 8 (1), Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act, before the Special Debt Settlement Board at Ranaghat for settlement of the aforesaid mortgage debt and some other debts owing by them. On 1st January 1940, the Special Debt Settlement Board dismissed the said application under Section 17 (2), Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act. The debtors, took no further steps in that matter and did not challenge the order by way of an appeal to the appellate officer. Nearly three years after that, the pet...
Tag this Judgment!Srikanta Kamar and anr. Vs. Atul Krishna Biswas and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-17-1944
Reported in: AIR1945Cal214
B.K. Mukherjea, J.1. The facts giving rise to this appeal may be shortly stated as follows: Respondent 1, Atul Krishna Biswas, obtained a mortgage decree against the appellants and the pro forma respondents in the Court of the First Munsif at Diamond Harbour on 11th December 1935. The decree was set aside on appeal; but was eventually restored on second appeal to this Court on 16th January 1940. The total amount decreed being Rs. 1863 and annas odd together with costs of all the Courts. On 15th June 1940, the appellants presented a petition for settlement of their debts under Section 8, Bengal Agricultural Debtors Act, before the Insenbaria Debt Settlement Board. The only debt specified in the application was that covered by the mortgage decree mentioned above, and the debtors put a cross mark in column 9 of the petition which signified that no part of the claim was admitted by them. There was a notice issued by the Debt Settlement Board to the creditor under Section 13(1), Bengal Agri...
Tag this Judgment!Miss A. Heape and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-08-1944
Reported in: AIR1945Cal319
ORDERSharpe, J.1. Appellant 1 has been convicted under Section 13 of Ordinance 35 of 1943, the Hoarding and Profiteering Prevention Ordinance and appellant 2 of abetment of that offence. The former has been sentenced to a fine of Rs. 100 or simple imprisonment for one month and the latter to a fine of Rupees 500 or rigorous imprisonment for three months. The offence which appellant 1 is said to have committed was the sale of a Peerless fountain pen for Rs. 10-2-6 against the controlled price of Rs. 4-3.0. Appellant 2 is said to have abetted this offence, because he marked the price on the pen. The only evidence adduced in the lower Court consisted in the statement of P. W. 1 who purchased the pen and was granted a cash memo receipt and P. W. 2, the investigating officer, who made a statement that appellant 2 was in charge of the stationery section and fixed the prices. On this evidence, the learned Additional Presidency Magistrate framed a charge of contravention of Section 4 (c) of th...
Tag this Judgment!Norman Vs. Golder (inspector of Taxes).
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-01-1944
Reported in: [1945]13ITR21(Cal)
LORD GREENE, M. R. - The appellant has evidently spent a great deal of time and has shown great industry in preparing his argument. He clearly is suffering under some sense of grievance in respect of the assessment, because the substantial point of his complaint appears to be the disallowance of a deduction in respect of medical expenses incurred by reason of the fact that he had to exercise his profession at a certain period in very uncomfortable conditions, and, in fact, as unfortunately it turned out, dangerous to his health, and he feels that he ought to be entitled to have his medical expenses treated as a proper deductible expenses. I think it is not untrue to say that the incidence of the Income Tax Acts on professional men in respect of expenses is not always, perhaps, quite as fair as one would wish it to be, as compared with their incidence on persons carrying on trades or business; but unfortunately we all have to live under it. All we have to do is to administer the law. I ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›