Kolkata Court April 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.
Mercantile Express Co. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Collector of Customs and ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Cal630,62CWN661,1978(2)ELT552(Cal)
ORDERP.B. Mukharji, J. 1. This is an application under Article226 of the Constitution by Mercantile ExpressCo. Ltd. It is directed against the decision of the Assistant Collector for Appraisement, dated 30th June, 1955, assessing Armco Nestable Culvertscomplete with accessories under Item 63 (28) of the First Schedule of the Import Tariff under the Indian Tariff Act. The applicant appealed to theCollector of Customs who dismissed the appeal on11-7-1955. 2. The appellate order of the Customs states the reason for assessing under Item 63 (28) of theIndian Customs Tariff in the following terms : 'It appears from the descriptive literature produced that Armco Nestable Culverts in question are made of fabricated corrugated steel sheets. These arc used as tunnelled drain for the passageof water under road bridges The main function of these culverts is to divert water in a particularchannel. These therefore cannot be considered to fall within the purview of 'steel structures' forconstruction ...
Kasi Prosad Khaitan Vs. Moti Lall and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-29-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal566,63CWN983
K.C. Das Gupta, J. 1. The question for consideration in this case is whether an application for execution, in which the mode in which the assistance of the court is required does not mention attachment or sale of the property but says that the decree-holder prays for realisation of the decretal dues by rateable distribution of the money that will he realised in Money Execution Case No. 26 of 1955 of this Court and other means, can be considered to be an application for execution validly made within the meaning of the section 73 of the Code of Civil Procedure. If such an application can be considered to have been validly made the orders for rateable distribution made by the executing court must prevail. If, however, the mention of the mode in which the assistance of the Court is required in the manner set out above is a defect which makes the application one on which the execution cannot proceed, the court had no jurisdiction to make an order for rateable distribution. Rule 11, Sub-rule...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Ganesh Chandra Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-25-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal337,63CWN343
Renupada Mukherjee, J.1. The salient facts involved in this appeal are not in dispute. A consignment of 222 bags of potatoes weighing 444 maunds was despatched from Patna Ghat railway station on the Eastern Railway on 2nd May, 1950, to Mograhat railway; station, the consignor being one Lakhi Chand Sha and the consignee being Mohatam Ram Subedau Singh. The goods were loaded in a wagon with an iron floor on the consignor's responsibility who also duly executed risk note in forms A and B. The wagon was attached to Down goods train No. 214 and when that train reached Jhanja station on 4th May, 1950, the wagon containing the potatoes was deiached and detained at that station till 11th May, 1950, on which date it was attached to another goods train. The consignment ultimately reached Mograhat station on 15th May, 1950, when the Station Master found that the entire stock of potatoes had decomposed so much that the potatoes were totally unfit for human consumption. Thereafter the potatoes were...
Sardar Chand Singh Vs. Commissioner, Burdwan Division and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-24-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Cal420,62CWN526
ORDERP.B. Mukharji, J. 1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution by Sardar Chanda Singh of Burdwan. The purpose of this application is to get a revolver licence. The applicant asks for the writ of mandamus and Certiorari against the orders of the District Magistrate and the Commissioner of the Burdwan Division refusing to issue any revolver licence to the petitioner. 2. The facts are short and brief. On 1st May, 1957, a notice was issued to the petitioner by the District Magistrate, Burdwan, stating; 'Whereas it appears from police report copy of which is enclosed that you are not a suitable person to hold revolver licence, you are therefore directed to show cause by 6-5-57 why your revolver licence shall not be cancelled on the grounds stated therein in the interest of public safety.' The police report stated: 'Sardar Chanda Singh and Babu Singh, sons of Mostama Singh of G. T. Road, Burdwan, are accused of a gruesome murder (vide Burdwan P. S. Case No. 27 dated 1...
Sardar Chand Singh Vs. Burdwan and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-24-1958
Reported in: 1958CriLJ1014
ORDERP.B. Mukharji, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution by Sardar Chanda Singh of Burdwan. The purpose of this application is to get a revolver licence. The applicant asks for the writ of mandamus and Certiorari against the orders of the District Magistrate and the Commissioner of the Burdwan Division refusing to issue any revolver licence to the petitioner.2. The facts are short and brief. On 1st May, 1957, a notice was issued to the petitioner by the District Magistrate, Burdwan, stating:Whereas it appears from police report copy of which is enclosed that you are not a suitable person to hold revolver licence, you are therefore directed to show cause by 6-5-57 why your revolver licence shall not be cancelled on the grounds stated therein in the interest of public safety.The police report stated:Sardar Chanda Singh and Babu Singh, sons of Mostiama Singh of G. T. Road, Burdwan, are accused of a gruesome murder (vide Burdwan P. S. Case No, 27 dated 12-1-57 ...
Haji MumtajuddIn Vs. Debendra Nath Seal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-22-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal78
Renupada Mukherjee, J. 1. Two questions have arisen for our decision in this appeal, first, what is the true location and identity of the land purchased by plaintiff respondent, Debendra Nath Seal, at a collectorate sale held on 22-12-1931 for arrears of land revenue and secondly, whether the claim of the plaintiff respondent is barred by limitation or adverse possession. These questions have arisen on the following allegations of the plaintiff in his plaint,2. One David Alexander Wills was the owner of a holding in Dihi Panchannagram, Division 5, Sub-division J, of 24 Parganas Collectorate bearing No. 87 of Smart's survey and No. 104 of the old survey and also bearing a Sadar Jama of -/6/7 pies. The holding was sold through the collectorate of 24 Parganas for arrears of land revenue and purchased by the plaintiff respondent who obtained a sale certificate. The plaintiff attempted to take delivery of possession through the collectorate but was resisted by one Pannalal Rajak and others ...
Kanai Lal Maity Vs. Shyam Kishore Das and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-22-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal76,63CWN334
K.C. Das Gupta, J.1. In the suit brought by the present appellant against these respondents he obtained a decree, the relevant portion of which was in the following terms: 'Plaintiff's title to the lands of Schedule Ka to the extent of l/5th share is hereby declared. He will get possession therein and will remain in possession of the same jointly with the defendants. Plaintiff's exclusive title to the lands of Schedule Kha is declared. He will get khas possession there in by evicting the defendants therefrom. His claim for damages or compensation is dismissed. He will get mesne profits in respect of the lands of Schedule Kha so long as they remained in possession of the defendants. The amount of the same will be determined hereafter in accordance with law.' This decree was made on 13-3-1951. We are informed that the plaintiff actually recovered possession of the Kha Schedule land sometime in May 1954. Long before this date, on 5-5-1951 he made an application for the appointment of a co...
Shri Debi Dutt Moody Vs. Shri Belan and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-22-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Cal398,[1959]35ITR781(Cal)
ORDERD.N. Sinha, J.1. The petitioner is Debi Dutt Moody. On or about the 29th January, 1951 the petitioner was assessed for income tax for the assessment year 1948/1949, on a total income of Rs. 79319/-, by the Income Tax Officer, Companies District IV, Calcutta. Thereafter, a notice under Section 29 of the Income-tax Act, 1922, was served upon the petitioner for payment of the sum of Rs. 14,501/- as income tax. This amount was duly paid. On the 27th March, 1957 notice was issued under Section 34 of the said Act; to be precise, under Section 34 (l)(a). One copy of the notice was sent by post and another copy was purported to have been served upon the petitioner personally on the 28th March, 1957. This service is disputed, and I shall have to deal with it in greater detail. The copy that was sent by post was received on the 4th April, 1957. One of the disputed points-raised in this application is as to whether the period of Limitation for 8 years applies to the re-opening of the assessm...
Chandmull JaIn and anr. Vs. General Assurance Society Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-22-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal558,[1963]33CompCas370(Cal),63CWN367
G.K. Mitter, J.1. This suit is based on a claim against an insurance company for loss of the plaintiff's property caused by erosion of the river Ganges at Dhulian. The defence put forward is that very soon after its acceptance the risk was cancelled under condition No. 10 of the defendant's standard policy of insurance for loss by fire and various other causes.2. The plaintiffs describe themselves as the kartas of a joint Hindu family governed by the Mitakshara School of Hindu law carrying on business under the name and style of Chandmull Lalchand at Anupnagar Bazar, Dhulian in the District of Murshidabad. The cause of action as laid in the plaint is as follows;(a) By two several proposals in writing both, dated 2-6-1950 the plaintiffs made proposals for insurance against loss or damage by fire, Cyclone, flood, change of course of river and/or erosion of river, land slides and subsidence to the extent of the sums of Rs. 51,000/- & 65,000/- on two several sets of houses and property bel...
Kalipada Jana and ors. Vs. Sarbeswar Panda and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-18-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Cal568,1958CriLJ1312
ORDER1. This is an application by Sarbeswar Panda who was opposite party No, 1 in Criminal Revision Case No. 322 of 1958 and is with notice to the learned Advocate for the petitioners in that Revision case. The application has been made under very unusual circumstances. On 11th of March, 1958 I issued a Rule in favour of the petitioners in Cr. Revn. Case No. 322 of 1958 who were members of the second party in a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This Rule was made returnable in two weeks and it came up for hearing on the daily list on 25th of March, 1958. On that day Mr. B. K. Panda, Advocate appeared before me and prayed for adjournment of the case, stating that he had instruction to appear in the case on behalf of the opposite parties but had not till then received any Vakalatnama. I adjourned the case for the day and did not take it up until 27th of March, 1958 on which day nobody appeared on behalf of the opposite parties. The case was thereafter heard ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »