Kolkata Court June 1953 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
The Indian Steamship Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, West Ben ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-11-1953
Reported in: [1953]24ITR448(Cal)
CHAKRAVARTTI C. J.-We are grateful to Mr. Sanyal that in arguing this reference he has not taken the time of the court in pressing for the contention on behalf of his client before the authorities below which is untenable on the face of it.The question arises out of a reference made under Section 66 (I) of the Income-tax Act, made by the Calcutta Bench of the Appellate Tribunal in respect of the assessments for the year 1945-46 and 1946-47 of the Indian Steamship Company Limited, Calcutta which is the assessee. It appears that this company was floated in 1928, but existed in moribund condition up to the accounting year 1943-44. Indeed, although purported to be a Steamship Company, its subscribed share capital did not exceed Rs. 3,000 during that period. In the accounting year 1944-45, the company appears to have thought of launching upon real business and wanted to issue shares of the value of the RS. 75,00,000 and debentures of the value of Rs. 25,00,000 in order to procure the necess...
Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal Vs. Samnugger Jute Factory Co. ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-11-1953
Reported in: [1953]24ITR265(Cal)
CHAKRAVARTTI, C. J. - This reference under Section 66 (1) of the Income-tax Act raises a point which is utterly unarguable and the learned Counsel for the assessees, at the end, could not but help conceding that it was so.The facts are as follows. There are two assessees, namely, the Samnugger Jute Factory Company Limited and the Titaghur Jute Factory Company Limited, both members of the Indian Jute Mills Association. Both, we are informed, keep their accounts by the English calendar year. It appears that in the accounting year 1947, the Samnugger Jute Factory Company Limited paid a sum of Rs. 20,130 to the Indian Jute Mills Association as its contribution to the Calcutta Rehabilitation Fund, which was being administered by the Association and similarly the Titaghur Jute Factory Company Limited paid a sum of Rs. 17,940 to the same Association for the same purpose. The Calcutta Rehabilitation Fund, we understand, was started for the purpose of giving relief to the persons affected by th...
T.D. Nandi and ors. Vs. Manot and Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal80,57CWN802
K.C. Chunder, J.1. These are nine second appeals against the appellate judgment of the Special Bench, Court of Small Causes, Calcutta, affirming that of the 6th Judge of the same Court in connection with nine ejectment suits filed by the same plaintiff against nine different tenants with respect to premises in the same building under the West Bengal Premises Rent Control (Temporary Provisions) Act of 1950.2. It is not disputed that there are as many as about 50 tenants in the same building, No. 40 Strand Road, Calcutta, an old building which was purchased at considerable cost by the landlord respondent. He served notices under Section 106, T. P. Act on all these tenants and in order to meet the bar under the Rent Control Act put forward the claim that he reasonably required the premises for building and rebuilding.3. I must begin with pointing out that both, the Courts below did not notice that under Section 12(1), second proviso (h) premises do not always mean the building. Premises h...
M.L. Das and Sons Vs. Sampatmull Bothra
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal103,57CWN894
ORDER1. This Rule arises out of a proceeding for standardisation of rent started by the tenant petitioner. The proceeding has had a long and chequered career and the circumstances under which the matter has now come up to this Court are of an unusual character. The proceeding started as far back as April 11, 1951. It had its usual run from the Rent Controller to the Appellate Judge and then to this Court.2. The Rent Controller standardised the rent under the proviso to Section 9(1)(f) of the Rent Control Act, 1950. On appeal it was held that the case was one under Section 9(1)(g) of the said Act and as the learned Judge had no materials before him for standardising the rent under that section, he dismissed the tenant's application.3. On being moved against this appellate decision, this Court reversed the said decision and held that the case was quite within Section 9(1)(f) of the Act and that, therefore, the residuary Section 9(1)(g) could not apply. This Court, however, found, on the ...
Calcutta National Bank Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, West Benga ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1953
Reported in: [1953]24ITR280(Cal)
CHAKRAVARTTI, C. J.-This is a reference under Section 66 (1) of the Indian Income-tax Act made by the Calcutta Bench of the Appellate Tribunal of two questions of law, one at the instance of the assessee and the other at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal. The question brought up by the assessee is a question under the Income-tax Act, but the question brought up by the Commissioner is a question of constitutional law.The facts are these. The assessee, the Calcutta National Bank Limited, now in liquidation, is, or rather was, a banking company in a large way of business. It owns a six-storeyed building where its own offices are located in the ground floor and a part of the sixth floor, while the rest of the space is let out to tenants. The annual rental income derived from the building is about Rs. 86,000 and the finding of the Tribunal is that the portion let out is about four to five times larger than the portion occupied by the assessee for the purposes of it...
Surja Kumar Mondal Vs. District Magistrate of Murshidabad and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-09-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal217,58CWN205
ORDERSinha, J.1. The petitioner is a resident of village Maharajpur in Union Daulatabad, Police Station Berhampore, district Murshidabad. In an election of the Daulatabad Union Board held on the 22nd, February 1953, 9 members including the petitioner were elected. One of the persons elected was opposite party No. 3, Md. Saraftulla Sirkar of village Ruhia. It appears that for the last 12 or 13 years, opposite party No. 3 has been in Government service & is even now employed in Government service as Union Agricultural Assistant of Paharpur Union in Lalbagh Sub-Division of the district of Murshidabad. He is a Government servant working under the Director of Agriculture, Government or West Bengal. Under the Bengal Village Self-Govornment Act 1919, Section 7, every person of full age of 21 years and having a place of residence within the union who satisfies certain condition and qualification laid down therein is entitled to vote and to be elected a member of the Union Board if he is a resi...
Achala Sundari Dassi Vs. Satish Chandra Mondal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-04-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal28,57CWN703
ORDERChunder, J.1. This Rule was issued in connection with pre-emption proceedings under Section 24, Non-Agricultural Tenancy Act. The petitioner is a tenant under a raiyat i.e. according to the classification of the Bengal Tenancy Act he is an under-raiyat.2. The first contention of the petitioner is that as the original raiyati was governed by the Bengal Tenancy Act, his rights as undertenant will not be governed by the Non-Agri-culiural Tenancy Act. This contention cannot prevail for the very simple reason that ncn-agrlcultural tenant and non-agricultural land have been defined in Section 2 of the Act, Clauses (4) and (5). In connection with Section 2 (4) it may be pointed out that land which comes within the Bengal Tenancy Act and is excluded is only land mentioned in Sub-clauses (b) and (c) cf Clause The land in the present proceeding does not come within either of there. There is no contention that the land has been let out and is used for purposes not connected with agri-cultura...
Khagendra Nath Vs. Junior Assessor, Procurement P.S. Sonarpur
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-04-1953
Reported in: AIR1953Cal719,57CWN684
ORDER1. These three Rules arise out of proceedings under the West Bengal Foodgrains (Intensive Procurement) Order, 1952. The Rules are directed against the order of the appellate officer rejecting the petitioners' appeals under the amended provision of the said Order giving a right of appeal to the persons aggrieved. Under the said provision the appeal has to be filed 'within seven days from the date of service of the order in Form No. C', -- to quote only the relevant part of that provision, --and in the particular cases before us it has been alleged by the petitioners,--and it has not been denied on behalf of the State--that the appeals in question were duly filed within the said time. In Civil Revision Cases Nos. 934 and 1036, the appeals were actually presented within three days of the date of service of the orders in Form No. C and in the other case the appeal was presented within six days from the date of such service. Clearly, therefore, the appeals were within time and it is su...
Gayaprosad Vs. Seth Dhanrupmal Bhandari and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-03-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Cal492,58CWN503
P.N. Mookerjee, J.1. The appellant Gayaprosad was one amongst a number of judgment-debtors under a mortgage decree. The mortgage was of the year 1935. The property mortgaged was a two-storied brick-built house at Kharagpur together with land appertaining thereto comprising an area of about 11 decimals and the amount advanced upon the mortgage was Rs. 7,500/-. In the year 1941, the mortgagee Seth Dhanrupmal Bhandari instituted Mortgage Suit No. 22 of 1941 in the First Court of the Subordinate Judge at Midnapore for the recovery of his dues under the said mortgage. The suit was decreed preliminarily on 31-1-1952, and the appeal therefrom was disposed of by this Court on 7-5-1946. Thereafter a final decree was made in the suit on 18-1-1950, and the same was put into execution on 15-3-1950, in Mortgage Execution Case No. 13 of 1950 of the First Court of the Subordinate Judge at Midnapore. After service of the usual notices under Order 21, Rule 66, Civil P. C., and other usual steps the mor...
Annapoorna Farming and Fishery Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-01-1953
Reported in: AIR1953Cal756
ORDERSinha, J.1. This is a rule issued upon the Opposite Parties to show cause why the directive dated 31-12-1052 served upon the petitioner under the West Bengal Foodgrains (Intensive Procurement) order 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the 'order'), should not be cancelled or why a writ in the nature of mandamus should not issue directing them to forbear from giving effect to the same.2. The facts are briefly as follows: The petitioner is a private limited company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act. Amongst other things, it carried on farming. On or about 12-11-1952, a notice dated 5-11-1952 was served upon the petitioner under the said order in Form 'Ka' (equivalent to Form 'A') in the Bengali language. As this notice has been attacked, I shall deal with it more fully later on. Pursuant to this notice in Form 'Ka', the petitioner filed a declaration in Form 'Kha' (equivalent to Form 'B') on or about 13-11-1952. That is also in the Bengali language. On 12-1-1953, the petition...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›