Kolkata Court August 1954 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.
Achut Anant Pai Vs. Governor General-in-council
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-25-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal331
Bose, J.1. This is a suit for recovery of Rs. 55,398/7/- for compensation for non-delivery of two consignments of Indian cotton twist yarn entrusted to the railway for carriage from Wadi Bunder and Ahmedabad, being stations on the G. I. P. Railway and B.B.C.I. Railway, to Raigarh, a station on the Bengal Nagpur Railway.2. This suit was originally filed in the Court of the 4th Subordinate Judge, Alipore District, 24-Parganas, as Money Suit No. .9 of 1945 on 12th April, 1945.3. The suit has been transferred to this Court by an order made under Clause 13 of the Letters Patent on 23rd of July, 1945.4. The matter has now been set down beforeme for trial of a preliminary issue as to whetherthis Court has jurisdiction to entertain and try thesuit. It is agreed by the parties that I shall trythis issue' first. 5. The case of the plaintiff as laid in the plaint is that the plaintiff carries on business in manufacturing and dyeing yarn at 24, Tantipara, Lane, Salkea, in the district of Howrah un...
Bhadani Brothers Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal, Cal ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-25-1954
Reported in: [1955]27ITR423(Cal)
CHAKRAVARTTI, C.J. - We have had some difficulty in following the facts of this case, because it does not appear at all clear what the assesses contention regarding the facts was and on what basis they wanted the questions of law to be considered. In the course of the argument I happened to observe that the assessees appeared to me to have been merely kite flying and Mr. Mitra, who was appearing for them before us, frankly confessed that as regards comprehending his clients case before the authorities below, he did not find himself in a better position.The assessees are a private limited company. It appears that during the accounting year ending in December, 1946, they became minded to acquire the managing agency of the Madhusudan Mills Limited, Bombay, and opened negotiations with the then managing agents, Messrs. Amersey Damodar. It is stated in the statement of case that the negotiations were for the purchase of the managing agency rights along with 80 per cent. of the share capital...
Maniklal Upadhya Vs. Ramesh Chandra Acharya
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-24-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal290,59CWN466
K.C. Das Gupta, J.1. These two Rules arise out of a suit brought by a person for recovery of arrears of salary for his service as the driver of a motor car. The plaintiff's claim was at the rate of Rs. 75/- per month. The defendant pleaded that the salary was at the rate of Rs. 60/- per month, that nothing was due and that the claim was barred by limitation. The learned Munsif rejected the plea of payment and decreed the suit at the rate of RSection 60/-. He d(sic) not, it appears, consider the plea of limitation.2. The only question raised in the Rule tained by the plaintiff (Civil Revn. No. 3327 1953) is that the Munsif was wrong in concluc(sic) that the salary was at the rate of Rs. 60/-month and not at the rate of Rs. 75/- per mo(sic) That however is a question of fact and even the Munsif has come to a wrong conclusion of acts, that would not justify our interfering with this order under Section 115, Civil F. C. This Rule must therefore be discharged.3. The Rule obtained by the def...
Debendra Chandra Saha and anr. Vs. Pramatha Chandra Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-24-1954
Reported in: AIR1958Cal700
K.C. Das Gupta, J.1. This case raises the question whether the Small Cause Court, Calcutta, acted without jurisdiction in trying a suit for recovery of arrears of rent for premises in Pakistan.2. The opposite party brought the present suit on the allegation 'that the defendants are tenants-at-will' in respect of a room in Dacca Municipality, at a rent of Rs. 38/- per month, and that the rents for the months Kartik 1357 to Jaisthaya 1358 had not been paid. It was further alleged that the rents from the months Sravan 1355 to Aswin 1357 were paid in Calcutta, and that the defendants 'came down to Calcutta immediately after the partition of the Province of Bengal', and all of them are living here permanently.3. It may be mentioned that defendants 2 and 3 are father and son, and they obtained the present Rule. Defendant No. 1 is the firm, of which defendants 2 and 3 are the partners.4. Defendants 2 and 3 filed written statementdenying liability. They also denied the jurisdiction of the Smal...
Honkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Vs. Commissioner of Income-ta ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-24-1954
Reported in: [1955]28ITR199(Cal)
CHAKRAVARTTI, C.J. - It has not been easy for us to follow the course which this matter has had, because no one seems to have known on what ground he was standing or stood long on the same ground.The assessees are the Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation. In their assessment year 1946-47, they climed a deduction of Rs. 4,23,271 which was the total of two debts of Rs. 2,90,458 and Rs. 1,32,813 due to them from a customer, named Messrs. C. M. Karanjia & Co. The first of the debts was due to the Calcutta branch of the assesses and the second to their Bombay branch.The Income-tax Officer disallowed the claim on the ground that, in his view, the bank had arisen have was upheld by the Tribunal in a further appeal to them.The transactions in the course of which the debts had arisen have been described by the tribunal in the statement of case originally submitted to this Court and the further statement submitted in accordance with the direction issued to them under section 66(4) of the Act....
Sashi Mohan Debnath and ors. Vs. State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal27,1955CriLJ100
Chakravartti, C.J.1. This is an application under Article 134(1)(c) of the Constitution of India for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against a judgment and an order of a Division Bench of this Court by which a Reference under Section 307, Criminal P. C., was disposed of.2. There were eight accused persons, all of whom were charged under Section 304, read with Section 149, Penal Code, and four of whom were further charged under Section 201 of the same Code. They were tried by the Additional Sessions Judge of the 24-Par-ganas with the aid of a jury. The jury returneda unanimous verdict of not guilty under Section 304,read with Section 149, Penal Code, in respect of all theaccused persons, but they found the same personsguilty under Section 147 and further found the chargeunder Section 201 proved against those who had beencharged under that section. The learned Judgewas not prepared to accept the verdict, in so faras it was a verdict of guilty and decided to makea Reference to this C...
Bakul Behari Roy Vs. Corporation of Calcutta and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-19-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal1,1955CriLJ36,59CWN28
Chakravartti, C.J.1. This reference raises two short questions under proviso (a) to Section 363(1) of the Calcutta Municipal Act. The facts which have led up to this Reference are as follows :2. On some date in 1950, one Badrudduja who was occupying a flat in the second storey of premises No. 15 Dhurrumtolla Street, Calcutta, made a complaint to the Corporation that one Abdul Hamid, who was occupying the ground floor, had erected a two-storeyed structure to the south of the building which was Interfering with his light and air. On receipt of that complaint, the corporation sent an officer to inspect the premises, who found that not only had a structure been erected in the back space to the south, but another structure had also been erected in the side space to the west. Both were two-storeyed structures with corrugated iron roofs and both were unauthorised.Thereafter, proceedings were commenced under Section 363, Calcutta Municipal Act and after hearing Abdul Hamid, the Corporation mad...
Commr. of Income Tax, West Bengal Vs. Allahabad Bank Ltd., Calcutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-19-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal289
Chakravartti, C.J.1. This is a reference under Section 66(1), Income-tax Act, read with Section 19, Business Profits Tax Act, of a single question of law at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal. The reference came up for hearing on a previous occasion -- on 4-5-1953, to be-precise -- when further hearing was adjourned on the ground that the identical point was pending consideration by the Supreme Court in an appeal from Bombay. An opportunity, however, was taken to reframe the question of law because it was felt that the basis on which the specific sum had been chosen was not clear and if the answer of the Court was limited to that sum, the opinion given on the question might mislead rather than guide. The real controversy between the parties, it was admitted, was whether the undistributed profits of any particular year carried forward to the first day of the chargeable accounting period next following, could be treated as a reserve and added to the paid up share...
Indian Steel and Wire Products Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, We ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-19-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal550,[1955]27ITR436(Cal)
Chakravartti, C.J.1. This is a reference under Section 66(1), Income-tax Act, read with Section 19 Business Profits Tax Act by the Calcutta Bench of the Appellate Tribunal of three questions of law. The facts are as follows,2. The common feature of the three questions is that, by each the Court's opinion is asked as to whether a certain amount was entitled to be treated as reserve for the purpose of the computation of capital in order that the abatement allowable to the assessee might be determined. The chargeable accounting periods are two, the first being 1-4-1946 to 31-3-1947, and the second being 1-4-1948 to 31-3-1949.With regard to the first chargeable accounting period, the -material fact is that the' balance sheet of the assessee company as at 31-3-1946, or what is the same thing, 1-4-1946, showed as unappropriated balance of Rs. 12,33,417/-. That sum was made up of two smaller sums. The first of the latter sums was an amount of Rs. 44,233/- which had been carried forward out of...
Chinmoyee Baxi Vs. on the Death of Raja Kalyani Prosad Singh Deo, His ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-19-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Cal561
Renupada Mukherjee, J. 1. The subject matter of this appeal lies within a very limited compass, viz., whether the certified copy of a certain deed, the original of which is lost and untraced and which was insufficiently stamped, can be admitted in evidence and used by the plaintiff-appellant. 2. In order to understand how this controversy, which is a controversy on a pure question of law, has arisen between the parties it will be necessary to set out only the following facts about which there is no dispute. One Anandamoyee Sarkar who was mother of Chinmoyee Bakshi, plaintiff in the Trial Court and appellant of this appeal, was the owner of certain collieries, and as she had financial difficulties in running them, she took financial and other assistance from her daughter, the plaintiff, who set up plants and machineries in the collieries and was admitted as a partner of her mother in the colliery business. A deed of partnership was accordingly executed by the parties on the 11-12-1937. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »