Kolkata Court July 1947 Judgments
Rustproof Metal Window Co., Ltd. Vs. Inland Revenue Commissioners.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-31-1947
Reported in: [1948]16ITR57(Cal)
LORD GREENE, M. R. - The matter in controversy between the parties relates to a sum of Pounds 3,000 paid to the respondent company under an agreement under seal dated December 30, 1939, which I will call 'the licence agreement.' The Special Commissioners rejected the companys contention that this was not an income receipt and had been improperly included as such for the purpose of the assessment to excess profits tax against which the company was appealing. The decision of the Commissioners was reserved by Atkinson, J., who held that this sum was a capital receipt. Our only task is to decide which of those two decisions is right.In order to decide the vexed question whether a receipt is of an income or a capital nature it is necessary to examine the facts with care and I must accordingly state as concisely as I can those which appear to me to bear more closely on the question. The original trade of the company, which was incorporated in the year 1935, was the manufacture of rustproof m...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioners of the Municipality of Howrah Vs. Rajendra Nath Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-30-1947
Reported in: AIR1948Cal109
Harries, C.J.1. This is a second appeal preferred by the defendants from a decree of a learned Subordinate Judge who modified a decree of a learned Munsif passed partly in favour of the plaintiff.2. The plaintiff who was the owner of a certain property wished to make certain constructions. This property was situate within the Municipality of Howrah. He submitted plans for the constructions to the Municipality of Howrah, but the Municipality neither approved nor rejected the application and plans within fifteen days. The plaintiff claimed under Rule 58 of Schedule 17 to the Calcutta Municipal Act, as extended to the Municipality of Howrah, that after the lapse of fifteen days he was entitled to proceed with the work. The Municipal Commissioners later refused to sanction these plans and the plaintiff brought a suit in the Court of the learned Munsif of Howrah in which he prayed for declaration that the plan filed by him on 20-1-1938 before the Municipal Commissioners was legal and in acc...
Tag this Judgment!Jogindra Nath Roy Vs. Dingmi Garoni W/O Raichand Sangma and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-23-1947
Reported in: AIR1948Cal114
Harries, C.J.1. This is a second appeal from an order of a learned Subordinate Judge dismissing an appeal from an order of a learned Munsif who set aside a sale under Section 174, Ben. Ten. Act.2. The ease for the applicant respondents was that the processes and sale proclamation had been suppressed and that in consequence the property had been sold at a very inadequate price. By reason of the fraud practised on them the applicants were unaware of the sale for some considerable time and they prayed in aid Section 18, Limitation Act to bring the case within limitation.3. The learned Munsif held that the processes had been suppressed and that there had been no sale proclamation. He further held that by reason of the fraud practised on them the applicants were unaware of the sale until shortly before they made the application. He accordingly set aside the sale.4. The present appellant appealed to the Court of the learned Subordinate Judge and there an entirely new point was taken on behal...
Tag this Judgment!Johra Bibi Vs. B.i.S.N. Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-18-1947
Reported in: AIR1948Cal113
Lodge, J.1. This is an appeal which purports to be under the provisions of Section 30, Workmen's Compensation Act (8 [VIII] of 1923). The material facts are as follows. One Nur Mohammad, a seaman on board S.S. 'Lancashire,' met his death on 6th February 1945, while the ship was at Liverpool. On 19th February 1946, his widow Zohora Bibi applied to the Commissioner of Workmen's Compensation, Bengal, for compensation in respect of this death praying that she was entitled to a lump sum payment of Rs. 3500, and requesting that an award of this amount be made. Her applicetion was resisted by Messrs. Mackinnon Mackenzie & Co., Managing Agents of Messrs. B.I.S.N. Co. Ltd., who contended that the death was not the result of any accident but was due to natural causes.2. The only witness examined in the case was one Fatey Hossain who deposed as follows:Nur Mohammad died on Tuesday, 6th February 1945, at Liverpool on board S.S. 'Lancashire.' I was mate Khansama. Nur Mohammad was carrying a bag of ...
Tag this Judgment!Prag Das Lakhutia and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-17-1947
Reported in: AIR1948Cal78a
ORDERSen, J.1. In my opinion, the orders of conviction and the sentences passed on the accused must be set aside. The accused were originally tried under various charges. Finally the charges were reduced to one namely a contravention of Rule 18 (2), All India Cloth Control and Yarn Control Order of 1945. The accused are said to have been in possession of cloth in excess of their 'normal requirements.' Rule 18 (2) of the aforesaid Order reads thus:No dealer or other person not being a manufacturer shall save with the permission of the Textile Cossimouer at any time hold stock of cloth or yarn in excess of his normal requirements.The three appellants used to live together. Their house was searched and from their boxes, almirahs and trunks 391 yards of cloth were discovered and on this ground only the three appellants have been convicted of violating the foresaid rule and fined Rs. 400 each. The only relevant evidence given is that the accused persons had 15 ration cards and that 391 yard...
Tag this Judgment!Khoda Bux Mal Vs. Ohadali Mal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-1947
Reported in: 1949CriLJ563
ORDERSen, J.1. Heard the learned advocate for the petitioner. No one appears to oppose the rule. The facts briefly are as follows: The petitioner Khoda Bux Mal was tried by ft Third Class Magiatrate Mr. B. Kahtnan at Munshiganj on a charge of theft. The learned Magistrate was of opinion that the sentence which he could pass as a third class Magistrate would not be adequate and he therefore purported to act in accordance with the provisions of Section 349, Criminal P. C, and submitted the record to the Sub-divisional Magistrate so that an adequate sentence may be passed. This learned Magistrate, Mr. B. Rahman, in forward-ing the record passed what has been described by the Sub-divisional Magistrate as a judgment and the 'judgment' consists of 81 typewritten pages (certified oppies). I mast confess that this learned Magistrate has been responsible for wasting the time of everybody by passing a 'judgment' of this description in a simple case. Section 349, Criminal P. 0. does not require a...
Tag this Judgment!B.N. Chatterjee Vs. Dinesh Chandra Guha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-07-1947
Reported in: AIR1948Cal58
ORDERSen, J.1. After hearing the learned advocate for the parties, I am of opinion that this reference must be rejected. The case briefly is as follows: One Dinesh Chandra Guha is alleged to have effected alteration in the water pipe of his house by persons who are not plumbers licensed by the Municipality and thereby having disobeyed the provisions of Section 291 (2), Calcutta Municipal Act, as extended to Howrah, Disobedience of the provisions of Section 291 is made punish, able by Section 483 of the aforesaid Act read with the table annexed to the aforesaid Section. He was prosecuted by the Municipality and his defence was a total denial of having effected the alteration. The learned Magistrate trying the case has found that the alteration was effected by Dinesh Chandra Guha employing certain Ooriya mistries. The Magistrate also found that the Ooriya miatries were not licensed plumbers. On these findings he convicted Dinesh Chandra Guha and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 30 in d...
Tag this Judgment!Sadhan Kumar Bhattacherjee Vs. Sunil Kumar Bhattacherjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-07-1947
Reported in: AIR1948Cal59
Lodge, J.1. This rule was issued upon the opposite parties to show cause why an order passed Under Section 84, Arbitration Act, 1940, should not be set aside.2. The material facts are as follows: The present petitioner, Sadhan Kumar Bhattacherjee, son of late Dwijendra Nath Bhattacherjee, instituted a suit against a number of defendants asserting that under a deed of partnership, dated 2lst September 1933, a deed of agreement dated 20th September 1933, his father Dwijendra Nath Bhattacherjee, had been, a partner of the defendants and since his father's death, he had become a partner of the defendants in the firm Chatterjee Shaw and Co. He asserted further that the partnership deed was executed by three persons, viz.: Jatindra, Manmatha, and Sunil, of whom Sunil was a benamdar of the plaintiff's father Dwijendra and the plaintiff's uncle Birendra. The plaintiff further asserted that for some time accounts were rendered and payments duly made to his father Dwijendra, but after a time acc...
Tag this Judgment!Governor-general of India in Council Vs. Corporation of Calcutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-04-1947
Reported in: AIR1948Cal116a
B.K. Mukherjea, J.1. This appeal is on be half of the Governor-General of India in Council, and is directed against a judgment of the Small Cause Court Judge, Sealdah dated 27th July 1944, made in an assessment appeal under Section 141, Calcutta Municipal Act. The subject-matter of assessment is premises No. 7 Gun Foundry Road, Cossipore generally known as the Cossipore Gun and Shell Factory, which comprises an area of 161 bighas 7 cottah 3 chittaks of land with various structures standing upon the same. In 1937, the premises including land and building was valued by the Calcutta Corporation, for purpose of assessment to conso lidated rates, at Rs. 3, 37, 175 per year, and the assessment made on that basis was to remain effective for a period of six years commencing from the 1st quarter of the year 1937-38. The next valuation became due in 1943, but before that, two intermediate valuations wore made, one in 1941 and the other in 1942, on account of substantial additions to and alterati...
Tag this Judgment!Sachindra Nath Kolya Vs. Probodh Chandra Sarkar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-04-1947
Reported in: AIR1948Cal126
B.K. Mukherjea, J.1. This Rule is directed against an order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Second Additional Court of 24-Parganas, dated 4-7-1942 allowing an application for amendment of the judgment and decree made in Title Suit No. 103 of 1927 of that Court. The facts so far as they are material for our present purpose may be shortly stated as follows:2. The opposite party, Probodh Chandra Sen who has since died and is represented by his Wife Sm. Pankajini Dassi, instituted a suit against one Swarnamoyee Dassi, the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner in the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge, 24-Parganas for establishment of his title to and recovery of possession of an eight annas share of certain Government Promissory Notes of the face value of Rs. 1,00,100 or in the alternative for value thereof together with interest and for other consequential reliefs. In the plaint, the value of the half share of the Government Promissory Notes claimed by the plaintiff was laid ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »