Kolkata Court September 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.
Provat Kumar Mitter Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-18-1958
Reported in: [1959]37ITR91(Cal)
CHAKRAVARTTI, C.J. - Three questions have been referred in this case and they arise out of the following facts. The assessee, Sri Provat Kumar Mitter, is the registered holder of 500 ordinary shares of the Calcutta Agency Ltd. By a written instrument, dated the 19th January, 1953, he settled on his wife, Sm. Ena Mitter, the right, title and interest to all dividends and sums of money which might be declared or might become due on account or in respect of those shares for the term of her natural life. The material portion of the instrument is short. After reciting that the settlor was desirous of making a provision for his wife, the instrument proceeds as follows :'This deed witnesseth that for a effecting the said desire and in consideration of the natural love and affection of the settlor for the beneficiary, the settlor, as the beneficial owner, assigns unto the beneficiary the right, title and interest to every dividend and sum of money which may be declared or become due and payabl...
Karanpura Development Co., Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, West B ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-18-1958
Reported in: [1960]38ITR484(Cal)
CHAKRAVARTTI, C.J. - The question referred in this case is whether the sums received by the assessee company as selami for granting sub-leases of coal-mining leases which it had itself obtained, were trading receipts in its hands and whether the profit contained therein, if any, was assessable under the Indian Income-tax Act. The question has arisen out of the income-tax assessment of the assessee for the years 1948-50 and 1950-51 and its business profits tax assessment for the chargeable accounting periods ending on December 31, 1948, and March 31, 1949, respectively. The single question referred is common to all the four cases and consequently a single reference has been made.On an ultimate view, the facts of the case are fairly simple, but their history is somewhat long. It appears that on March 26, 1915, a firm of the name of Bird and Co., acquired from the Court of Wards, representing the proprietor of the Ramgarh Estate a prospecting licence with respect to an area, called the Ka...
Lalu and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-17-1958
Reported in: AIR1960Cal776,1960CriLJ1579,64CWN671
Bhattacharya, J. 1. Five appellants were tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Howrah, with the help of a Jury and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment on a finding of guilty under Section 304(II) and Section 148 I.P.C. so far as the appellant Lalu alias Baliram, alias Sewji Kurmi alias Khatik is concerned, under Section 304(II)/149 and Section 148 I.P.C. as regards appellants Dinantb Goala and Sankar Kurmi alias Nata, and under Section 304(11) read with Section 149 as also under Section 147 I.P.C. in regard to appellants Ramabatar Singh and Shyamlal Singh.2. Without a Jury the learned Sessions Judge further tried the five appellants of whom Ramabatar Singh and Shyamlal Singh were acquitted and appellants Lalu and Sankar Kurmi alias Nata were convicted under Sections 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act and were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years on each count, the sentences running concurrently, and appellant Dinanath alias Dina was convicted under Sections 4(a...
Bhutnath Das and ors. Vs. Sahadeb Chandra Panja
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-16-1958
Reported in: AIR1962Cal485,66CWN645
Das Gupta, J.1. This case raises a question of considerable importance and of some difficulty. The question is whether a trial court after it has ordered specific performance of a contract, on a sum or money being put in within a specified time and also ordered that if the money is not put in within that date, the suit would stand dismissed, has jurisdiction thereafter to extend the time.2. The petitioner Bhutnath Das and others brought a suit for redemption of a mortgage or alternatively for specific performance for an agreement for re-conveyance. On the 23rd August 1957 the trial Judge passed the following order:'Ordered that the suit be decreed on contest with costs. Plff's alternative prayers for reconveyance of the property is allowed. Plaintiffs shall deposit the sum of Rs. 14725/- in favour of the defendant within a fortnight from to-day in court. If the deposit is made within the specified time, the defendant shall execute a deed of re-conveyance in respect of the suit properti...
Tulsiram Bhagwandas Vs. Sitaram Srigopal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-16-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal389,63CWN300
P. Chakravartti, C.J. 1. This appeal falls to be determined on a short point, but in the course of the argument, a wide ground was covered by the parties with a considerable citation of authorities on both sides.2. The two main questions in the appeal are whether in setting aside a decree by which he had himself allowed a part of the Respondent's claim in the suit and disallowed the rest and restoring the suit to the list for further trial, G.K. Mitter, J. was right and, secondly, even if he was not right, whether an appeal at all lies from his order.3. The facts are as follows : The Respondent firm brought a suit against the Appellant firm for specific performance of a contract of sale by delivery of the goods sold and, in the alternative, for the refund of a sum of Rs. 35,200/- which had been paid as the full price of the goods, as also a further sum of Rs. 1,32,559/- as damages. The Appellant's defence was that it had always been ready and willing to deliver the goods, but it was th...
idannessa Bibi Vs. Syed Abdul Wadud
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-16-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal462,63CWN170
Renupada Mukherjee, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit between the plaintiff landlady who is appellant of this appeal and her tenant who is respondent in this appeal. There was no dispute in the Courts below as to the existence of the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties, nor was there any dispute as to the amount of rent of the disputed premises. The landlady instituted the suit in the Trial Court for eviction of the tenant on the ground that he was a defaulter, and he had disentitled himself from getting any protection against eviction by non-payment of rent for the period required by law. Service of a notice to quit purporting to determine the tenancy was also alleged to have been served upon the tenant.2. The suit was contested by the defendant whose defence was that no valid notice to quit had been served upon him, and that he had not committed such default as had deprived him of protection against eviction.3. During the pendency of the suit an application un...
Aluminium Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. Coal Board
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-11-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal222
P. Chakravartti, C.J.1. The controversy in this appeal is as to whether Section 8(1)(a) of the Coal Mines (Conservation and Safety) Act, 1952, so far us it purports to impose a duty of excise on all coal raised and despatched from collieries in India, is a valid piece of legislation and even if it be valid, whether it applies to so much of the coal raised from the appellant's colliery as is consumed in its own power house. Logically, the second question should come first, because if the section does not apply to the appellant's colliery, it is immaterial to the appellant whether the section is valid or not. I shall, however, deal with the two points in the order in which they were argued.2. The controversy has arisen in the following way: The appellant, the Aluminium Corporation of India Ltd., is a large concern, manufacturing aluminium and it has its factory at Jaykaynagar in the district of Burdwan. The plants in the factory are driven by electricity, for the supply of which the fact...
Everett Orient Line Incorporated Vs. Jasjit Singh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-11-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal237,1959CriLJ439,63CWN986
D.N. Sinha, J.1. The facts in this case are shortly as follows: The petitioner, the Everett Orient Line Incorporated, is stated to be a Company incorporated under the laws of Liberia, having its registered office at Monrovia in Liberia and its principle office at 310, Sansome Street, San Francisco in the United States of America. No one seems to know where Liberia is situate or Monrovia. While it is not possible to say that they do not exist, it seems that considerable mystery surrounds their location. The Company carries on business in India through its Agent, the Everett Steamship Corporation, which has its office at No. 35, Royal Exchange Place (Extension), Calcutta. The Company owns a number of ships and has been carrying cargo between Japan and Calcutta via all important ports in Far East and Burma. One of the vessels belonging to the petitioner Company, and with which we are concerned in this case, is M/V 'Rebeverett'. The vessel, in its voyage No. 41, departed from Kobe on .15-6...
Dasarathy Banerjee Vs. Kripal Singh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-11-1958
Reported in: AIR1960Cal454,1960CriLJ903
J.P. Mitter, J. 1. This is an application for contempt against the three respondents who are respectively, the General Manager, Chief Personal Officer and Divisional Superintendent of Eastern Railway having its Head Office at 17, Netaji Subhas Road. Calcutta. It is said that the respondents and each of them were guilty of a contempt of court, in that there was, on the part of each, a deliberate disobedience of a mandatory injunction issued against the General Manager, Eastern Railway, directing him to with-draw forthwith an order of suspension upon the petitioner. This injunction was passed by a learned Munsif in T.S. 989 of 1955. Instituted by the petitioner against the General Manager, Eastern Railway, and the Union of India. The various claims of the petitioner were allowed by a decree dated the 5th of May, 1958. The text of the decree has been set out in paragraph 4 of the petition. 2. Mr. Nalin Chandra Banerjee appearing on behalf of the petitioner has contended that the special d...
Debi Dutta Moody Vs. T. Bellan and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-11-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Cal567
ORDERD.N. Sinha, J.1. The facts in this case arc shortly as follows: The petitioner carries on business in Calcutta. On 29-1-1951, ho was assessed for income-tax for the assessment year 1947-48 on a total income of Rs. 1,15,5327- by the Income-tax Officer-Companies District IV, Calcutta. On the 6th of February 1951, notice under Section 29 of the Indian Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') was issued demanding payment of Rs. 39,337/4/0 as tax. The petitioner paid that amount. On the 19th of March 1956, a notice was issued upon the petitioner under Section 34 of the said Act. In the said notice it was alleged that the Income-tax Officer had reason to believe that the income of the petitioner assessable to income-tax for the assessment year 1947-48 had escaped assessment and he proposed to re-assess the said income which had escaped assessment. The petitioner was called upon to make a return in the prescribed form. Although the notice was issued on 19-3-1956, it is not d...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »