Kolkata Court March 1959 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.
Saha Stores Vs. Commercial Tax Officer and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-06-1959
Reported in: [1959]10STC311(Cal)
The facts of this case are shortly as follows :-1. On or about 13th September, 1948, the petitioner was registered as a dealer within the meaning of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'. Since then, sometime in March, 1955, the authorities refused to issue further declaration forms to the petitioner and the petitioner took out a Rule from this Court being C.A. No. 2961 of 1955. On the 17th July, 1956, the petitioner intimated to the Court that he was not going on with the application and the rule was discharged. Between the 2nd and 14th August, 1956, the petitioner was called upon to deposit as security a sum of Rs. 2,000 in exercise of powers conferred upon the Commissioner under Section 7 (4a) (ii) of the said Act as reasonable security for the proper custody and use of the declaration forms. Thereupon 20 declaration forms were issued. In December, 1956, further security of Rs. 8,000 was demanded which the petitioner furnished between the 7th...
Sugandha Mohan Bhattacharjee Vs. N.M. Mukherjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-05-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Cal521,64CWN494
U.C. Law, J. 1. The plaintiff, who is a shareholder of defendant company (Def. 8) has brought two applications in the present suit which was, filed by him with leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent for a declaration that certain alleged, meetings of the defendant company held at different dates mentioned in the plaint and certain resolutions passed at the said meetings are illegal, ultra vires and not according to law and not binding on the plaintiff and/or the defendant Company. For the purposes of these two applications it is not necessary for me to state here in detail the facts of this case because it will suffice if I only indicate that the plaintiff's main grievance in the suit as originally filed was that the alleged meetings were held without any notice to him. Of the two applications-now brought By the plaintiff, one is for fresh leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent in respect of the amendments sought for in the plaint and the other application is for leave to ame...
Shambhu Nath Ghosh and ors. Vs. Bejoy Lakshmi Cotton Mills Ltd. and or ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-05-1959
Reported in: AIR1959Cal552
Das Gupta, C.J. 1. These two appeals are against the decision of Sinha J., directing the issue of an appropriate Writ for setting aside and quashing a Notification of 4-2-1955 and a declaration of 21-7-1956 under S. 4 and S. G respectively of the West Bengal Land Development and Planning Act and also the agreement entered into between the Society of Farmers and Rural Industrialists and the Government as regards the payment of compensation for the acquisition of the lands. These orders were made on the application of Bejoy Lakshmi Cotton Mills Ltd. to whom the lands acquired under these proceedings belonged. It was contended by the applicant that the sanction of a scheme, which is an essential prerequisite of an order for declaration, had not been given in accordance with law. Several other objections to the proceedings taken in the application were not pressed. One point that the notification was bad in law as there had been no satisfaction of the State Government in accordance with la...
Calcutta National Bank (In Liquidation) Vs. Abhoy Singh Sahela and anr ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-02-1959
Reported in: AIR1959Cal464,63CWN467
Lahiri, J.1. Three questions of some importance arise for consideration in this appeal and before I proceed to consider them on merits I must record my grateful appreciation of the ability with which learned Counsel appearing on both sides have presented their respective cases before the Court. The first question is whether an unsecured Creditor of a limited company has any locus standi in a proceeding for extension of time for registration of a mortgage or charge under Section 120 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 as amended by Act XXII of 1936. The second question is whether the Court is competent to extend the time under that section for registration of a mortgage or charge in a case which comes under Section 109-A of the Indian Companies Act of 1913, and if the answer to the second question be in the negative, the third question is whether an order of extension actually made by the Court under Section 120 (as amended by Act XXII of 19S6) in a case which comes under Section 109-A, i...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›