Kolkata Court February 1957 Judgments
Pramatha Nath Mukherjee Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-28-1957
Reported in: AIR1957Cal378,1957CriLJ712
ORDERDebabrata Mookerjee, J.1. The petitioner has been convicted tinder Section 323 of the. Indian Penal Code by the Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate of Calcutta and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 50/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month.2. The prosecution case briefly stated is that on the 23rd February, 1956, an Inspector of the Collection Department of the Calcutta Corporation proceeded to No. 1, Prannath Sen Lane, accompanied by bailiffs to execute a distress warrant. It is said that the petitioner, an occupier of the premises, resisted execution and abused the Corporation staff and caused hurt to one of the bailiffs. As the result of investigation consequent on an information lodged, the police submitteda charge-sheet under Section 332 of the Indian Penal Code, The Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate took cognisance but on perusal of the papers and documents filed before him along with the charge-sheet, came to the conclusion that the case was one u...
Tag this Judgment!Bharat Board Mills Ltd. Vs. the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner a ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-28-1957
Reported in: AIR1957Cal702,61CWN694
ORDERBose, J. 1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution for an appropriate writ directing the respondents to rescind or withdraw certain orders made by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, West, Bengal, and the Central Provident Fund Commissioner, New Delhi, and to forbear from giving effect to such orders and also to cancel certain notices of demand issued under the Bengal Public Demands Recovery Act in Certificate Case No. 14 E. P. F. of 1954 and 1955 in the Court of Certificate Officer, 24 parganas. 2. The case of the petitioner is that it is a company registered under the Indian Companies' Act. On 29th June 1950, a certificate of incorporation was granted by the Registrar of Joint Stock Company, West Bengal, and the petitioner commenced business from 31st July, 1950. The business of the petitioner company consists in the manufacture and dealing of all kinds of board paper and pulp including pulp board, card board and straw board etc. The petitioner holds ...
Tag this Judgment!The Corporation of Calcutta Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-26-1957
Reported in: AIR1957Cal548
P.N. Mookerjee, J. 1. These are two rating appeals under the Calcutta Municipal Act, involving a common question of law. In appeal No. 198, the premises under assessment is No. 8, Judges Court Road. In appeal No. 284, the dispute is with regard to premises No. 10, Circus Avenue. Both the premises admittedly belonged to the Central Government (now the Union of India) on and from April 1, 1943. Prior to that date, the premises were' owned by the Bengal Telephone Corporation. There is no dispute that, during the period of the said ownership, that is, up to March 31, 1943, the premises were, liable to Municipal tax. There is dispute, however, as to whether they were liable to such tax from after that date, or, what is directly relevant for our present purpose, whether they are liable to such tax after the Constitution. This question of liability after the Constitution is, strictly speaking, the only point, arising for decision in these appeals, though, for deciding the same, reference to t...
Tag this Judgment!Md. Yakub Mallik Vs. Commissioner of the Garden Reach Municipality and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-25-1957
Reported in: AIR1957Cal460,61CWN479
ORDERSinha, J.1. The petitioner states that he has been carrying on the trade or business of butchering; animals within the Garden Reach Municipality, under a license duly granted by the said Municipality. It appears that there is a slaughter house of which the petitioner is a part owner, and this has been licensed by the Municipality, and the slaughter house obtained the requisite certificate as provided for in Section 4 of the West Bengal Animal Slaughter Control Act 1950 (Act XII of 1950). It is stated by the petitioner that the animals which were intended to be slaughtered used to be kept in a stockyard or place attached to the slaughter house, previous to their being transferred to the slaughter house for the purpose of slaughter. It is also stated that there is a quarantine pen attached to the said slaughter house as required by law. On the 11th March, 1953 the Commissioners of the Garden Reach Municipality passed a resolution, a copy whereof has been annexed to the affi-davit-in...
Tag this Judgment!East India Commercial Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-25-1957
Reported in: AIR1957Cal606,1957CriLJ1116
ORDERSinha, J.1. This is an application in respect of the importation by the petitioner company, the East India Commercial Coy. Ltd., of a quantity of Flourescent Tubes and Fixtures from the United States of America. Before I deal with the facts of the case it would be necessary to investigate about the law applicable to such importation. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-rule (3) of Rule 84 of the Defence of India Rules, the Government of India issued a notification No. 23-ITC/43 dated 1-7-1943. prohibiting the bringing into British India by sea, land or air from anyplace outside India, of any goods of the description specified in the schedule annexed to the said notification. It is unnecessary to deal with the notification in detail, it being sufficient to refer to item 78 of the schedule whereby Electrical Instruments, Apparatus and Appliances can only be imported under a License issued by any Officer specially authorised in this behalf by the Central Government. It is admi...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Indian Iron and Steel Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-22-1957
Reported in: AIR1957Cal234
ORDERP.B. Mukharji, J.1. This is an application by the Indian Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. seeking the Court's confirmation of the alteration of the Memorandum of Association of the company effected by the Special Resolution passed on 7th' December, 1956 at a general meeting of its shareholders. The Special Resolution is carried by the requisite majority.2. The Special Resolution reads as follows : ''That Sub-clause 3 (16) of the Memorandum of Association of the company be deleted and substituted by the following two sub-clauses.16(a) To subscribe, contribute or guarantee money for any national, charitable, benevolent, political, public, general or useful object or funds or for any exhibition.16(b) To establish and support or aid in the establishment and in support of associations, institutions, funds, trusts and conveniences calculated 'to benefit persons who 'are or have been employed by or who are serving or have served the company or its predecessors-in-business or the dependents, connect...
Tag this Judgment!Sm. Jasoda Haldar Vs. Sailendra Nath Samanta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-20-1957
Reported in: AIR1957Cal372,1957CriLJ707,61CWN483
Debabrata Mookerjee, J.1. This is a reference made by an Additional Sessions Judge of 24-Parganas recommending that the verdict of the jury acquitting the accused Sailendra Nath Samanta be set aside and that he be re-tried in accordance with law under Section 304, Penal Code.2. The accused was placed on his trial on a charge under Section 304, Penal Code, before an Assistant Sessions Judge and a jury. The allegations were that at about 8 p.m. on 26-6-1954, one Jatindra Chandra Haldar having trespassed into the plantain grove of Sailendra with a view to stealing green bananas, Sailendra fired a shot from his gun which wounded Jatindra over the left buttock and this resulted in the latter's death. On 27-6-1954, at about 9-15 a.m. the accused went to Magrahat Police Station and lodged an information.The police thereafter proceeded to Magrahat Railway Station where Jatindra had been removed and recorded there another statement made by the deceased Jatindra. An investigation followed which ...
Tag this Judgment!Parul Bala Sen Gupta Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-19-1957
Reported in: AIR1957Cal379,1957CriLJ713,61CWN361
ORDERDebabrata Mookerjee, J. 1. This is a petition for revision of an order mode by the Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate of Calcutta dated the 23rd November, 1958, whereby the petitioner Parul Bala Sen Gupta was called upon to show cause why she should not pay compensation under Section 553 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. The petitioner had made a complaint to the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Anti-Rowdy Section, Enforcement Branch, charging one Ranjit Das Gupta with having enticed her minor daughter aged about 11 years and ravished her. The allegation further was that Ranjit was a depraved person who had been involved in similar Incidents in the past and was a menace to the petitioner and her people. Protection was accordingly sought for and it was prayed that the miscreant might be removed from the locality. The matter was sent by the Deputy Commissioner to the Amherst Street Police who on receipt of the petitioner's complaint took cognisance and started investigation un...
Tag this Judgment!Standard Vacuum Oil Co. Vs. the Commercial Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-19-1957
Reported in: AIR1957Cal528,61CWN600
Chakravartti, C.J.1. The petitioner, the Standard Vacuum Oil Company, wants to appeal to the Supreme Court from an order passed by Sinha, J., whereby he discharged a Rule nisi issued by himself at the instance of the petitioner upon an application made under Article 226 of the Constitution. The prayer in the petition is that 'if necessary', a certificate be granted in terms which appear to be the terms contemplated by both Article 132 and Article 133.2. It appears that a certificate under Article 132 has already been granted by the learned trial Judge himself by an observation made by him at the end of his Judgment. He has certified that the case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution. No particular form is required for a certificate under Article 132. It is also well settled that on questions covered by Article 132, an appeal lies directly to the Supreme Court from the decision of even one learned Judge sitting singly, if he gives the neces...
Tag this Judgment!Sitalpore Colliery Concern Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-15-1957
Reported in: AIR1957Cal319,61CWN440,[1957]32ITR26(Cal)
ORDERSinha, J.1. The petitioner in this case is the Sitalpur Coal Concern Ltd. It has a colliery business. The petitioner filed its return for the assessment year 1948-1949 before the Income-tax Officer, Company's District II, Calcutta. There was an item with regard to the quantity of coal consumed under the heading, 'Boiler and Colliery consumption account'. According to the petitioner it had claimed a total consumption of 21.5 p.c. of the total raisings on this heading. According to the respondents, about 26 p.c. was claimed. On or about the 13th February, 1953, the assessment order was made and only 15 p.c. was allowed under this heading. It is stated on behalf of the respondents that the Company had kept no accounts of daily consumption, but produced a monthly account without any details, and the claim for consumption under this heading was out of proportion to the amounts that were found in the workings of the neighbouring collieries. On or about the 14th March, 1953, the petition...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »