Kolkata Court September 1957 Judgments
Ramrichpal Agarwalla and ors. Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-12-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Cal257,62CWN561
ORDERSinha, J. 1. The same point or law is involved in this Matter (No. 154 of 1957), and Matters Nos. 2 to 9, being the next eight cases in the list. There has been only one set of arguments and all the Matters will abide by the result of this judgment.2. The petitioner carries on business as manufacturer of, and dealer in, rice and paddy. The petitioner has a rice mill at Basantlal Saha Road, in Tollygunj, a suburb of Calcutta. On or about 28-8-1957, the petitioner received two orders, signed by the respondent No. 2, copies whereof are annexed to the petition and marked as Exhibit 'A'. We are concerned in this application with Exhibit A at page 11 the relevant part whereof is as follows:'In exercise of the powers conferred on the Government of West Bengal under Clause (f) of Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act. 1955 (X of 1955), read with Clause (b) of Section 5 of the said Act and Order No. SRO 1925 of the Government of India dated 7-6-1957, the Governor is...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Narayan Goswami and ors. Vs. Biswanath Goswami
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-11-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Cal366,1959CriLJ705
ORDERN.K. Sen, J. 1. This Rule was issued upon the District Magistrate, Burdwan, and the opposite party to show cause why an order passed under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure declaring the first party to be in possession of certain plot of land should not be set aside.2. It appears that the disputed land belonged to the deity Sree Madan Gopal Jiu of which the petitioners (second party in the proceedings) and the father of the first party (opposite party in this rule) are the shebaits. The opposite party claimed to be in possession of the disputed land as tenant under the deity represented by the shebaits while the petitioners contended that the disputed lands were the khas lands of the said deity and were in actual possession of the bargadars of the deity.3. A point was taken that the petitioners did not claim actual possession of all the disputed lands which they stated were in the actual possession of the bargadars of the deity and hence on the admission of the petitio...
Tag this Judgment!Priya Nath Choudhury Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-11-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Cal387,1959CriLJ707
ORDERN.K. Sen, J.1. This Rule was issued for quashing the proceedings in Cases Nos. C-1631 and C-1632 of 1956 pending against the petitioner before the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta.2. The facts leading to the institution of the aforesaid proceedings may be summarised below in order to appreciate the grievance made by the petitioner in this Court.3. 'Retail Textile Dealers' Syndicate' was a limited company incorporated in the year 1948 under the Indian Companies Act, 1913. The petitioner Priyanath Choudhury was from the very inception a director of the said company. The Company went into liquidation and was directed to wound up by an order made in the Original Side of this Court. After the company went into liquidation and when liquidation proceedings were pending, the petitioner on the 8th November, 1954, filed a complaint before the Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta, under Section 282 and Section 133 (3) of the Indian Companies Act and also under Sections 468, ...
Tag this Judgment!Dooars Tea Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, West ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-11-1957
Reported in: [1958]34ITR786(Cal)
CHAKRAVARTTI C.J. - This reference under section 63(1) of the Bengal Agricultural Income-tax Act comes back to us after remand.The assessee is a public limited company, called the Dooars Tea Co. Ltd., carrying on the business of growing, manufacturing and selling tea. For the accounting year 1948, relative to the assessment year 1949-50, the company returned an agricultural income of Rs. 3,45,702. The Agricultural Income-tax Officer increased that amount to Rs. 4,41,940 including therein a sum of Rs. 39,849 as the market value of the assessees agricultural income from bamboo, thatch and fuel timber. The assessee objected to the addition of that sum on two grounds which shall specify later.The factual position with regard to the bamboo, thatch and fuel timber has been found to be as follows :The company hold a large tract of land under a lease from the local Government and in a part of it they grow bamboos, thatching grass and fuel timber. During the calendar year 1948, they cut down so...
Tag this Judgment!Hemanta Kumar Bhattacharjee Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-09-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Cal239
ORDERSinha, J. 1. The facts in this case are briefly as follows: The petitioner Hemanta Kumar Bhattacharjee, was employed in the Postal Department as Sub-Post Master of the Mission Row-Post Office. On 2-9-1950, he was arrested on a charge under Sections 261, 262 and 409 I. P. C.. read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. On 5-9-1950, he was suspended, with effect from 2-9-1950. He was sent up tor trial before the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta who discharged him on 13-10-1950. On 16-1-1951 he was resummoned on the identical charges by the Chief Presidency Magistrate. By a notification of the West Bengal Government dated 1-2-1951, the case of the petitioner was allotted to the Court of a Special Judge, Mr. S. C. Dutta Gupta under West Bengal Act XXI of 1949. The petitioner thereupon moved the High Court in Criminal Misc. Revn. no. 283 of 1951 & on 4-4-1952, a special bench of this Court, quashed the proceedings in the Court of the Special Judge, being of the opi...
Tag this Judgment!Ashraf Ali Khan and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-06-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Cal219
Chakravartti, C.J.1. The appellants before us are seven hundred and eighty-four individuals and, strange it might seem, three inanimate objects. They, along with one other individual were petitioners in an application under Article 226 of the Constitution and by that application they challenged the formation of the Kharagpur Municipality by the State of West Bengal and the first tax assessment made by the Commissioners of the Municipality. As to the formation of the Municipality, it was complained that the area constituted into a municipality was not a town, that it was not a compact area and that the adjoining railway settlement had been unwarrantedly excluded. As to the tax assessment, it was complained that the assessment had not been made 'by any qualified panel of assessors as provided under Section 145 of the Ben. Municipal Act'. Accordingly the petitioners prayed for the issue of a writ of mandamus upon the State of West Bengal and the Joint Secretary of the State Government in ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal, Calcutta Vs. Govindalal Dutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-04-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Cal195,[1958]33ITR630(Cal)
Chakravaktti, C.J.1. On the 4th September, 1951, one Govindalal Dutta, an owner of a tea business, filed voluntary returns of his income in respect of five consecutive years. Those were assessment years 1946-47 to 1950-51. Of the returns so filed, that for the assessment year 1946-47 showed a loss of Rs. 37.925-2-9 and that for 1947-48 snowed a loss of Rs. 36,033-15-0, while that for the year 1948-49 showed a paltry profit of Rs. 75-3-3. In making assessments on these returns, the Income-tax Officer paid no attention to the returns for 1946-47 and 1947-48. The first return to be dealt with was the return for the year 1948-49 and on that return he made an assessment on an income of Rs. 5,545/-.2. It does not appear from the Income-tax Officer's order that he was asked to take into account the losses of the earlier years and set them off against the profits for the assessment year 1948-49, if he found that losses incurred in earlier years had been made out. In the assessee's appeal to th...
Tag this Judgment!Rai Harendranath Chaudhuri Vs. Sm. Daulatmani Chaudhurani
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-04-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Cal539,62CWN143
S.C. Lahiri, J.1. These three revision cases raise the question whether Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act will apply to appeals under section 27 of the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act of 1949. The facts of these three cases which are not disputed are these:2. On 29-9-1956, the Thika Tenancy Controller made an order of ejectment against the opposite parties and an appeal against that Order was filed in the court of the District Judge, 24-Parganas, on 20-11-1956. Under Section 27 of the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act the period of limitation for filing an appeal against an order of the Controller is 30 days from the date of the order. In all these three cases the opposite parties filed applications for extension of time under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act on the allegation that though the order had been passed by the Controller on 29-9-1956, the opposite parties on account of physical infirmities of various descriptions, came to know of the order on 5-11-1956. They made an applicati...
Tag this Judgment!Tarunendra Nath Tagore and Others Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, West ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-03-1957
Reported in: [1958]33ITR492(Cal)
CHAKRAVARTTI, C.J. - By a single reference, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred to this court two questions of law, said to be common to applications for refund made by eight different reasons with respect to two consecutive years. It was conceded on behalf of the assessees that while a consolidated reference concerning the assessment of the same assessee for different years could be made, if the question of law arising out of the Tribunals order passed in regard to them was common, no such consolidated reference was permissible in respect of assessments of or applications by different assessees. In the present case, there is a further irregularity. On the one hand, the cases of eight different assessees have been combined in a single reference. On the other hand all the necessary papers regarding even one of them have not been included in the paper book. Apparently, the Tribunal intended that the case of Tarunendra Nath Tagore should be taken as typical of the whole group, ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›