Kolkata Court June 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.
Naresh Chandra Gangopadhyay Vs. Director of Fisheries, Government of W ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-27-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal100
P. Chakravartti, C.J. 1. On 27-10-1944, the appellant, Naresh Chandra Gangopadhyay, was appointed a District Fishery Officer along with several other persons. He was put on probation for a period of two years and the order of appointment specifically provided that he would be confirmed in service 'on the satisfactory completion of the period of probation and the passing of a departmental examination, which may be prescribed during the period.' No departmental examination was held during the probationary period, but the appellant was allowed to continue in service. An examination was held in 1951 and the appellant did appear in it, but was unable to pass. Up to the time when the proceedings out of which this appeal has arisen were commenced, he had not passed the departmental examination. We are informed that he passed it while he was under suspension.2. On 22-9-1951, the appellant was placed under suspension by an order passed on that date. Along with the order, a charge-sheet containi...
Bharatendra Nath Bhattacharya Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, West Ben ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-26-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Cal559
Chakhavartti, C.J.1. The appellant, Bharatendra Nath Bhattacharya, joined the Income-tax Department as an Inspector on 6-8-1949 and while working in that capacity, was appointed to officiate as a temporary Income-tax Officer, Class II Grade III 'until further orders.' It appears that at the same time, several other persons were similarly appointed to officiate in posts of temporary Income-tax Officers of the Class & Grade concerned -- apparently posts newly created. The copy of the order of appointment forwarded to the appointees, including the appellant, contained the following warning:'If their output is not un to the required standard or if for any reason their work is found unsatisfactory, they are liable to be reverted.'2. The tenure of the appointment which the appellant got was thus a very precarious one. It was only to last until further orders and it was liable to be terminated, if he was not found fit to hold the post.3. The appellant failed to qualify for a favourable opinio...
Public Trustee Vs. Inland Revenue Commissioners.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-26-1958
Reported in: [1959]37ITR43(Cal)
LORD EVERSHED M. R. The originating summons in this case raised the question of the liability to estate duty under the Finance Act, 1894, in respect of a share of the income of the estate of the late Lord Northcliffe which one Henry Preuss Arnholz, who died on August 31, 1955, had enjoyed for his life.I do not think it necessary that I should go at length into the facts or, indeed into the arguments of this case, both of which are fully stated in the judgment of Dankwerts J. Suffice then to say that under Lord Northcliffes will the income of the residuary estate was, for a period terminating as provided by the will, divided among a number of income beneficiaries, each taking a specified share or fraction, so that when any one income beneficiary died, the total income was then divided among the survivors or survivor.At the date of Arnholzs death his share amounted to the three of the 49 1/2 shares into which the income was then divisible; but the interest in the income which Arnholz enj...
Mrs. Prativa Sasmal Vs. Agricultural Income-tax Officer and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-24-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Cal585
ORDERD.N. Sinha, J.1. This application and a number of other applications have been heard together and acommon set of arguments have been made. The point involved in all these applications is the constitutionality of certain provisions of the Bengal Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1944 (Bengal Act IV of 1944) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and of the Rules made thereunder. So far as this application is concerned, the facts are shortly as follows:2. The petitioner is interested in certain agricultural lands situate in the district of Midnapore. She is the administratix pendente lite of her deceased husband's estate. There is included in the estate of the deceased, about 787.88 acres of khas land. It is the agricultural income-tax payable in respect of this land that has given rise to the dispute in this case. The petitioner filed a return of agricultural income for the accounting period 1361 B. S. showing a total income amounting to Rs. 30,585-0-10 1/2. On 30-6-1956 the respondent No...
Satya Charan Sur Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-24-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal609,63CWN325
ORDERB.N. Banerjee, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 5 of the Court-fees Act.2. The Registrar of the Appellate Side of this Court, as the Taxing Officer, referred two questions for consideration, on the ground that they were matters of general importance, viz., :--'I. If the question, whether acquisition was made for public purposes or not should be gone into, in computing Court fees under Section 8 Court fees Act, in an appeal against an order of the Arbitrator appointed under Act XXX of 1952. II. Whether fixed Court-fee is payable under Schedule II, Article 11 of the Court-fees Act in an appeal against the order of the Arbitrator, in view of the Bombay decision reported in Hirji Virji Jangbari v. Govt. of Bombay, AIR 1945 Bom 348.' 3. The circumstances giving rise to the above two questions may be summarised as hereinbelow :4. Two plots of land were requisitioned for military purposes under Sub-rule (1) of Rule 75A of the Defence of India Rules. On the expiry of the Defence of...
Salil Kumar Banerjee Vs. Sailendra Ghose and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-20-1958
Reported in: AIR1960Cal203
ORDERB.N. Banerjee, J.1. An interesting question regarding the substitution of heirs, on the death of the deceased plaintiff, has been raised in this Rule.2. One Bimala Bala Ghosh now deceased, tiled a suit for ejectment of the defendant petitioner from premises No. 117, Akhil Mistry Lane, Calcutta, in which the defendant was a tenant.3. The aforesaid suit, being Suit No, 1889 of 1952, was decreed ex parte on 22-2-1953.4. Thereafter, on 1-4-1953, the defendant petitioner filed an application, under Order 9 R. 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for setting aside the aforesaid ex parte decree, on the allegation that he came to know of the decree only on 31-3-1953. The aforesaid application was registered as Misc. Case No. 61 of 1953.5. During the pendency of the aforesaid Misc. case, the plaintiff decree-holder Bimala Bala Ghosh died, on 23-12-1953. One of her sons Anil Kumar Ghosh entered appearance in the Misc. Case, under Order 9, R. 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, on 18-1-1954 and...
Brojo Lakshmi Paul and anr. Vs. Sailendra Nath Banerjee and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-20-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal260,1959CriLJ446
ORDERN.K. Sen, J.1. The petitioner Brojolakshmi Paul is the wife of the other petitioner--Madan Mohan Paul and the opposite party Sailendra Nath Banerjee is a monthly tenant under Petitioner No. 1 Brojo Lakshmi in respect of a shop room at 59/2, Baitakkhana Road, Calcutta at a monthly rental of Rs. 15/5/- plus Rs. 2/- as electric charges for one light. The petitioners were tried before the Presidency Magistrate, 3rd Court, Calcutta on charge under Section 426 of the Indian Penal Code and were convicted of that charge and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 50/- each in default to rigorous imprisonment for one month. Out of the fine, if realised, a sum of Rs 50/- was directed to be paid to the complainant--opposite party as compensation. It is against this order of conviction and sentence passed on the petitioners that the present Rule is directed.2. The prosecution case against the petitioners is that on 1-12-1957 the electric connection of the said shop room of the complainant had been cut...
Rasha Ranjan Haldar Vs. Inspector-general of Police and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-19-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal103,62CWN782
P. Chakravartti, C. J. 1. I cannot say that this case was very satisfactorily handled in the Court below or that the materials which wore really conclusive of the single point urged before the learned Judge were placed before him. But the decision arrived at seems, nevertheless, to be correct.2. The appellant was a Poliee Constable attached to the Rajpur Outpost within the Police Station, Sonarpur, District 24 Parganas. It appears that the higher authorities had some information that constables on traffic duty were realising illegal gratification for allowing lorries which were dangerously loaded to pass unchallenged. A plan was then devised for detecting delinquent constables in the actual commission of the offence. On a particular day two high-ranking Police Officers, one of them the Deputy Superintendent himself, got into a lorry, loaded heavily with straw, and concealed themselves in the middle of the vehicle. When the lorry was nearing the Rajpur market, the appellant is said to h...
Wright Vs. Boyce (inspector of Taxes).
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-18-1958
Reported in: [1959]36ITR504(Cal)
The following case not referred to in the judgment was cited in argument : Calvart v. Wainwright.JENKINS L.J. This is an appeal from a judgment of Vaisy J. dated March 6, 1958, whereby he upheld a decision of the special commissioners in favour of the Crown to the effect that the taxpayer, Joseph Wright, was taxable under Schedule E on certain voluntary payments made to him at Christmas in each of the seven years 1948/49 to 1954/55.The taxpayer was employed as a professional hunt servant. He had been a hunt servant all his life and, in 1946, he was appointed huntsman to the Bathurst Hunt. He remained there from 1946 to 1952 or thereabouts and he then went from the Bathurst Hunt to the Woodland Pytchely Hunt. In his capacity as huntsman successively with these two hunts he was the senior member of the hunt staff and occupied a responsible position. It is important to observe that the taxpayer was engaged in the case of each hunt by the master and not by any body which could be said to b...
Shiromoni Prosad Bhakat Vs. the Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Burdw ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-17-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal490
Chakravartti, C.J. 1. The appellant, Shiromoni Prosad Bhakat, complains of an order of Sinha, J., dated 20-3-1956, whereby the learned Judge declined to issue a Rule on an application made by the appellant under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Although no Rule was issued, the learned Judge placed on record his reasons for not issuing a Rule in a short order. 2. The case concerns the appellant's assessment for the year 1947-48. It appears that in the return filed by him, he showed an agricultural income of Rs. 3,312, but the Income-tax Officer was not satisfied that the return made was correct and complete. Accordingly, he called upon the appellant to produce evidence in support of his return and in fact considered that evidence and heard the appellant on 10-11-1947. A short order, recorded on that date stated that evidence had been produced and it had been checked and that the assessment order would be made 'later on.' 3. The appellant's case is that he heared nothing further...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »