Kolkata Court April 1959 Judgments
SerajuddIn and Co. Vs. Michael Golodetz and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-29-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Cal47,63CWN717
P.N. Mookerjee, J.1. In this appeal, which arises out of an application under Section 34 of the Indian Arbitration Act and in which the plaintiff-appellant Serajuddin and Co. seeks reversal of an order of stay of its suit under the said section, pending a certain arbitration proceeding, two questions arise for consideration. The first is whether the said section has any application to the instant case and the second relates to the exercise of discretion under that section. Before the learned trial Judge (Ray, J.), another point was also urged, namely, whether the arbitration clause in question suffers from any material vagueness which would render it inoperative or ineffective in law. But that point was not pressed before us by the learned Counsel who appeared in support of the appeal. 2. The learned trial Judge held, inter alia, that Section 34 of the Indian Arbitration Act applied to the present case and that it was a fit case for the exercise of his Discretion under that section in ...
Tag this Judgment!B.R. Herman and Mohatto (India) Pr. Ltd. Vs. Swedish East Asia Co. Ltd ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-29-1959
Reported in: AIR1967Cal24
ORDERG.K. Mitter, J.1. This is an application for stay of a suit under a clause contained in a bill of lading reading 'any dispute arising under this bill or lading is to be decided in Sweden according to Swedish Law.'2. The dispute relates to a shipment of 1034 bundles of M. S. Flats shipped by A. B. Cottrain of Stockholm, Sweden on April 28, 1956. The goods were loaded at Gothenburg in Sweden on the ship 'Kyoto' belonging to the Swedish East Asia Co. Ltd., described in the plaint as a limited liability company incorporated under the appropriate laws of Sweden and having its office at Gothenburg in Sweden outside the jurisdiction of this court and carrying on business through its agent United Liner Agencies of India (Private) Ltd. at No. 18, Brabourne Road, Calcutta within the jurisdiction of this court. The bill of lading is dated April 28, 1956. The ship reached Calcutta within a few weeks thereafter. The plaintiffs complaint is that it received only 1020 bundles out of the consignm...
Tag this Judgment!C.T. Prim and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-29-1959
Reported in: AIR1961Cal177,1961CriLJ371
Bhattacharya, J. 1. This is an appeal against an order of conviction under Sections 292 and 292/109 I. P. C. and sentence of three months' R. I. and a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default, R. I. for a further period of three weeks. 2. The first appellant, C. T. Prim, is a partner of India Book House, at 1, Lindsay Street, Calcutta, end appellant No. 2 Mohonlal Lalwanj, is the sales-man in the shop. 3. On 20-4-54 copies of three books, The Dark Urge, The Shame of Mary Quinn and Find Me in Fire along with three other books were seized by the police on the allegation that they were obscene. The learned Magistrate found that only the three books specified above came within the mischief of Section 292 I. P. C. 4. It has been urged inter alia on the side of the appellants that the books are not obscene. Further it is contended that in the absence of mens rea the appellants should not have been convicted. Jn the written statement filed by appellant Prim in the court of the learned Presidency Magi...
Tag this Judgment!Hari Lal Bandopadhyya and anr. Vs. Gora Chand Mallick
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-28-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Cal592
B.N. Banerji, J.1. This appeal, at the instance orthe defendants, is directed against an appellate decree affirming the decree passed by a learned Munsir.2. The suit, out of which this appeal arises, was for declaration of the plaintiff's right of passage over the land described in schedule 'Kha' to the plaint, acquired as an easement and for permanent Injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with that right of passage. The prayers as originally made in the plaint were subsequently amended and over and above the reliefs claimed, the plaintiff further claimed declaration of the plaintiff's right of passage over the disputed land as easement of necessity.3. According to the plaintiff, one Gourhari Das Naskar and certain other persons were owners of three plots of land, namely, c. s. plots Nos. 1518, 1519 and 1522 at Mouza Purba Barisa, within the Jurisdiction of Behala P. S., District 24-Parganas. To the West of c. s. plots Nos. 1519 and 1522, according to the plaintiff, th...
Tag this Judgment!The Corporation of Calcutta and ors. Vs. Sarat Chandra Ghatak and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-28-1959
Reported in: AIR1959Cal704
Das Gupta, C.J. 1. The orders against which this appeal is directed were made by Sinha J., on an application by the Manager of the Purna Theatre and the executor to the estate of Manomoy Banerjee, who is carrying on business under the name of Purna Theatre. As people who frequent cinema houses are aware, advertisements are displayed on the screen during the usual hours of display of pictures. According to the present appellants, the owners of the theatre are bound in law to take out licenses in respect of the display of such advertisements on payment of money in accordance with the rules made by the Corporation under Section 229 of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1951. The owners of the Purna Theatre having refused to take out such licenses, the Deputy License Officer of the Corporation wrote to the Manager on 5-1-1956 stating that action would have to be taken within the specified date for enforcement of law in respect of this. On the 2nd of February 1958 the License Inspector issued a no...
Tag this Judgment!Shivram Poddar Vs. Income-tax Officer (Central) Circle Ii Calcutta and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-27-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Cal433,[1960]40ITR155(Cal)
ORDERD.N. Sinha, J.1. The facts in this case are shortly as follows: In the year 1947, the partnership firm of Balmukund Radheshyam came into existence. The petitioner, Shivram poddar was a partner of the said firm. It appears from the returns filed by the Firm for the years 1949-50 and 1950-51, that the principal place of business of the firm was at No. 138, Cross Street, Calcutta, with branches at Ratlam, Indore and 357, Kalbadevi Road, Bombay. The1 firm carried on business as commission agent in cotton, sale and purchase of cotton and cotton piece goods, and speculation in cotton and silver. It is said that the firm was dissolved in February 1950. and that the notice of dissolution of the firm was duly given to the Income Tax Officer, Special Survey Circle III, Calcutta, by March, 1953. This however, is denied by the respondents. On August 20, 1952 a return was filed in respect of the income of the firm before the Income Tax Officer, Special Survey Circle III, Calcutta in respect of...
Tag this Judgment!New Churulia Coal Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-23-1959
Reported in: AIR1959Cal585
K.C. Das Gupta, C.J. 1. The main question for decision in this appeal is whether the plaintiff, who is the appellant before us, should be allowed to raise an issue as regards relief under Section 65 of the Indian Contract Act though the suit as framed was for recovery of a sum of money on the basis of a contract and on an allegation of failure of consideration for the contract. It appears that the plaintiff being in need of a Lancashire Boiler registered its requirement with the Department of Government which had been helping parties in India to obtain such boilers from abroad. By a letter dated 31st of January 1946 addressed to the Assistant Coal Commissioner of the Department of Industries and Supplies. Government of India, the plaintiff requested allocation of 2 Lancashire Boilers including one 'by John Thompson with a working pressure of 150 lbs. per sq. inch complete with fittings, mountings and firebars'. On 19th February 1946 the Assistant Coal Commissioner wrote that one second...
Tag this Judgment!M. Tilak and Co. Vs. Third Industrial Tribunal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-23-1959
Reported in: AIR1959Cal797,63CWN697
P.B. Mukharji, J.1. In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution, the Management of M. Tilak and Co., a transport business firm, seeks for a writ of certiorari to set aside the awards of the Industrial Tribunal and the Labour Appellate Tribunal. Many disputes were referred to the Industrial Tribunal of which only two are now important. The first one was : 'What should be the quantum of bonus for the years 1951, 1952 and 1953'? The second one was whether the workers were eligible to receive wages for the entire strike period from the 26th August, 1953 to the 11th February, 1954.2. The Industrial Tribunal by its award dated August 18, 1953, decided that bonus equivalent to one month's basic wages for the year 1951 and bonus equivalent to two months' basic wages for the year 1952 should be paid to the workmen who were on the muster roll of the Company respectively during these respective financial years. The question of bonus for the year 1953 was left open and not decided. T...
Tag this Judgment!John Patterson and Co. (India) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer, District V ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-23-1959
Reported in: [1959]36ITR449(Cal)
PRASANTA BEHARI MUKHERJEE, J. - This is an application by John Patterson & Co. (India) Ltd. under article 226 of the Constitution for a writ of certiorari and mandamus challenging certain income-tax assessment orders and certificate proceedings. The dispute arises with regard to the assessment of R. W. Baddley, an employee of the petitioner. He was employed as a sales manager on a monthly salary of Rs 750 and a commission of 1 1/2 per cent. on the total sales.The only point urged by the learned advocate for the petitioner is that the notices of the certificates referred to 'The Principal Officer, M/s. John Patterson and Co. (1) Ltd. (a/c R. W. Baddley)' and was, therefore, bad under section 18(9) of the Indian Income-tax Act, which provided that 'Every person deducting income-tax..... shall at the time of payment of the sum from which tax has been deducted furnish to the person to whom such payment is made a certificate to the effect that income-tax.... has been deducted and specifying...
Tag this Judgment!Tincowri Haldar Vs. Nanigopal Mondal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-22-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Cal258,63CWN711
Lahiri, J.1. This appeal has been referred to tile Division Bench by Banerji J. on account of a conflict oil judicial opinion on the point that arises for consideration in this appeal. That point is whether the appeal filed by the respondent in the lower appellate court was barred by limitation. The plaintiff who is the appellant before us filed a suit for recovery of possession of 1.22 acres of land on declaration of his tenancy right under defendant No. 2. The disputed land was described in two schedules of the plaint, namely, schedules Ka and Chha. The prayer made by the plaintiff in the plaint was to the effect that the plaintiff's tenancy right might be declared under defendant No. 2 in respect of the land described in schedule Ka of the plaint. The second prayer in the plaint was that a permanent injunction might be passed against defendants Nos. 1 and 2 restraining them from exercising any act of possession in respect of the land described in schedule Ka or in the alternative if...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »