Kolkata Court December 1958 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.
Manilal and Sons Vs. Purushottam Umedbhai and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-18-1958
Reported in: AIR1960Cal15
Das Gupta, C.J.1. This appeal raises the question whether when a suit has been instituted in the name of a partnership firm carrying on business outside India as plaintiff, a procedure which is not permitted by Order XXX, Rule 1 of the C. P. C. under which only partnership firms carrying on business within India may institute suits in the firm name, the defect can be cured later on by substituting in place of the firm name, the name of the individuals, who are the partners of the firm, by way of amendment. The plaintiff's name as mentioned in the plaint in the present suit is : 'Manilal and Sons, a firm carrying on business at No. 11A Malacca Street, Singapore'. It was subscribed in these words:'Manilal and Sonsby their constituted attorneyD. P. Dunderdale'. The verification was also by the same gentlemen, D, P. Dunderdale, describing himself as constituted attorney of Manilal and Sons. This suit was instituted on 31-3-1951. Written statement was filed by the defendants, but no objecti...
Midland Bank Executor and Trustee Co., Ltd. Vs. Inland Revenue Commiss ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-18-1958
Reported in: [1960]38ITR56(Cal)
December 18. JENKINS L.J., after stating the facts, continued : On the part of the trustees, Mr. Pennycuick argued, albeit somewhat faintly, the the deceased was merely one of the objects of a discretionary trust whose death merely put an end to his chance of participating in the income to some unpredictable extent through the exercise of the discretion in his favour and enhanced the respective chances of the two daughters of so participating by reducing the number of objects of the discretion. If the trust could properly be regarded as a discretionary trust it appears to me that Mr, Pennycuicks argument on this part of the case would be unanswerable. But I agree with the judge that this is not a discretionary trust in any relevant sense. The nephew and the nephews wife no doubt had a discretion as to the directions to be given from time to time, but it appears to me that their power of giving directions was in the nature of power of appointment and that each direction given was in the...
Kamal Kanto Das Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-17-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal342,1959CriLJ694
S.N. Guha Ray, J.1. This reference under Section 374 of the Cr. P. C. for the confirmation of the sentence of death passed upon Kamal Kanto Das and his appeal arise out of his trial for having murdered Nemai Charan Das, an uncle of his. His father Netai was also put on trial along with him and the charge against both was under Section 302 of the I. P. C. read with Section 34 of the I. P. C. Netai was acquitted of the charge on a majority verdict of 5: 4. Kamal, however, was found guilty of the charge by a majority verdict of 8: 1. The learned Judge agreed with and accepted this verdict, convicted him and sentenced him to death,2. Nemai was a brother of Netai, father of Kamal, the appellant. Nemai used to live in Holding No. 29 which abuts on Umesh Banerjee Lane proceeding from West to East and also on another branch of Umesh Banerjee Lane proceeding from the main branch northward. Holding No. 29/1 which is in the possession of Netai lies on this northward branch of Umesh Banerjee Lane ...
Kedarnath Kanoria and ors. Vs. Khaitan Sons and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-17-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal368
R.S. Bachawat, J. 1. This is an anneal from an Order made by my learned brother G. K. Mitter. J., in suit No. 1252 of 1948. The, suit was originally instituted, in the name of Surajmull Hanumandas, claiming the price of: goods sold and delivered to the defendant. By an order dated 16-1-1950, the plaint was amended by substituting the name of Hanumandas Kanoria the then karta of the joint family business carried on under the name and style of Surajmull Harmmandas, as plaintiff. On or about 1-11-1951, the joint family, of which Hanumandas was the karta, was disrupted and thereupon Hanumandas and one Subhkaran Kanoria and one Biswanath Kanoria became the kartas of the three branches of the family and as such became entitled to the business of Surajmull Hanumandas and the assets thereof including the claim against the defendant firm. On or about 24-7-1952, Hanumandas Kanoria died leaving Kedarnath as Karta of his branch of the family. On 27-7-1958, an application was made on behalf of Keda...
Tarapada Sarkar Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-12-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal640,1959CriLJ1163
ORDERS.K. Sen, J.1. This rule was issued on the application of the petitioner for quashing a proceeding under Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code pending before the Police Magistrate, Alipore, and in the alternative for the direction that the case should be tried according to the procedure laid down in Section 252 and the subsequent sections of the Criminal Procedure Code.2. The facts of the case are briefly as follows: The police while investigating a cognizable case, namely, an offence under the Arms Act, became aware of a non-cognizable offence, namely, an offence of criminal intimidation, punishable under S, 506 or the Indian Penal Code committed or alleged to have been committed by the petitioner Tarapada Sarkar. The police investigated into that offence also without having obtained any order from a Magistrate for the investigation of the non-cognizable case. The police, after investigation, submitted a charge-sheet in the cognizable case under the Arms Act and submitted a report...
Vegetable Products Ltd. Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-12-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal783
ORDERD.N. Sinha, J.1. The facts in this case are shortly as follows : Prior to December 1951, Messrs. Sisir Oil Industries Limited carried on business as manufacturer of vegetable oils and edible oils at its factory at Belghuria in the district of 24-Parganas. In or about February 1952, by an order of this Court in its company jurisdiction, the said company, namely Sisir Oil Industries Ltd. was ordered to be wound up by Court. In January 1952, a provisional Liquidator was appointed. Thereafter in April 1952 Official Liquidators were appointed and an order was made directing them to sell the assets and properties of Sisir Oil Industries Ltd. The Official Liquidators sold the factory and it has eventually been purchased by the petitioner company, which commenced manufacture from December 1953. 2. In November 1956, the petitioner was asked to comply with the provisions of the Employees' Provident Funds Act (Act XIX of 1952) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and to pay its contributio...
Shankarlal Poddar Vs. Gobinda Prosad Lath and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-11-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal324,[1960]30CompCas187(Cal)
K.C. Das Gupta, C.J. 1. This appeal is against an order of P.B. Mukharji, J., directing the acceptance of a bid of Rs. 2,25,000/- and the sale of lot No. 1 of certain properties to Banshidhar Shankarlal and approving and confirming the same and a consequential order giving the Liquidators who had conducted the sale liberty to draw their remuneration out of the deposit of the purchase price after passing their accounts and certain other consequential orders, which need not be detailed. It appears that on 8-9-1956, a sale was held at the office of Gobinda Prosad Lath and Shashi Bhusan Tewari, Joint Receivers and Liquidators, of the property consisting of machinery and other goods. The sale started at about 2 p.m.--the opening bid being the sum of Rs. 1,50,000/-. The successive bids were Rs. 2,00,000/-, Rs. 2,05,000/-, Rs. 2,10,000/-, Rs. 2,25,000/-, Rs. 2,30,000/-, Rs. 2,40,000/-. Rs. 2,50,000/-, Rs. 2,55,000/-, Rs. 2,60,000/-Rs. 2,65,000/-, Rs. 2,70,000/-, Rs. 2,75,000/-, Rs. 2,80,000/-...
Sukchand Roy Vs. SefazuddIn Mohammad
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-11-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal505,1959CriLJ970
S.K. Sen, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by Sri T. P. Mukherjee, Sessions Judge, Jalpaiguri, recommending that the final order passed in a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure be set aside on the ground of defect of parties. Proceedings under Section 145 Cr. P. C. were commenced on the petition of Sukchand Roy who claimed certain land on behalf of his mother-in-law Subasini Debya. The learned Magistrate after a police enquiry was satisfied that there was an apprehension of a breach of the peace and he drew up proceedings under Section 145 Cr. P. C., and after considering the affidavits and documents filed by the parties under the amended procedure, passed an order in favour of the 1st party holding that Sukchand Roy was in possession of the disputed land on behalf of his mother-in-law and forbidding disturbance of such possession until the 1st party was evicted in the course of law. 2. The learned Sessions Judge o...
C.V. Krishnan Vs. Virji Kunverji and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-11-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal498,1959CriLJ964
S.K. Sen, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 417 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, directed against the acquittal of the respondents Virji Kuverji and Bhulchand Padamshi in respect of a charge under Section 477A of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The case of the complainant appellant, C.V. Krishnan was briefly as follows: The appellant became a partner of a firm, Virji Kuverji and Co. and a partnership deed was drawn up on 1-1-1954 by the three partners, namely, the appellant and the two respondents. It was also registered with the Sub-registrar of Assurances, Calcutta. According to the terms of the partnership deed the appellant, C. V. Krishnan, was to remain in Calcutta to look after the interest of the firm at Calcutta. He was a five annas sharer under the partnership deed and he was to receive a monthly salary which was to be fixed between the parties in addition to his interest as a five annas partner. According to the appellant his salary was fixed at Rs. 250/-and in April and Aug...
In Re: U.N. Mandal's Estate Private Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-10-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal493,[1960]30CompCas172(Cal),63CWN889
ORDERP.B. Mukharji, J. 1. This is an application by two persons Nagendra Nath Mandal and Biswanath Mandal. The application is made under two specific sections which are described as Sections 433 and 560 of the Companies Act, 1956. Section 433 deals with the circumstances in which the company could be wound up by the Court. Section 560 deals with the power of the Registrar to strike a defunct company off the register and the Court's power either to restore the company or to wind up the company thereafter. 2. The applicant Biswanath Mandal has no locus standi. He is neither a registered shareholder nor a member nor a director of the company Rai Saheb U. N. Mandal's Estate Private Ltd. An application for winding up can be made by persons and authorities mentioned in Section 439 of the Companies Act. The applicant Biswanath Mandal does not come within that classification. An application under Section 560 for restoration under Section 560(6) of the Act can only be made by the company, membe...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »