Kolkata Court September 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.
Bengal Agricultural and Industrial Corporation Ltd. Vs. Corporation of ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-01-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Cal123
P.C. Mallick, J.1. This is a suit for a declaration of rights of the plaintiff under a contract with the defendant Corporation, injunction to prevent a breach thereof by the defendants, for damages andfor other reliefs. The plaintiffs case is that by an Indenture dated 25-10-1951 the defendant Corporation granted a licence to the plaintiff whereby the plaintiff acquired the sole and absolute right to draw and remove sludge from the Pruss Sedimentation Tank at Bantalla including the lagoons and to utilise and convert the same into manure and sell it as a commercial product. For such purpose the plaintiff acquired the right under the agreement to occupy 20 bighas of land. The agreement was for 10 years commencing from 9-1-1949 with an option for further period. Ever since the plaintiff proceeded to work out the said licence, market the sludge and had acquired a well-established reputation and created a goodwill of considerable value. The defendant Corporation during the subsistence of th...
Prafulla Ranjan Sarkar Vs. Hindusthan Building Society Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-01-1959
Reported in: AIR1960Cal214
S.P. Mitra, J.1. In this suit the plaintiffs case is that in 1948 he was employed by the defendant as its Secretary at a salary of Rs. 750/- per month on a confirmed basis. Subsequently the defendant granted a car allowance to the plaintiff at the rate of Rs. 100/- per month over and above the plaintiffs salary. Before joining the defendant company the plaintiff was holding a responsible position under Messrs. Birla Brothers Ltd. The plaintiff left that service and joined the defendant solely on promises and assurances made by or on behalf of the defendant that the plaintiffs services under the defendant would be of a permanent nature continuing as long as the plaintiff remained in a fit state of health able to discharge the duties of his office satisfactorily. On 30-9-1954 the defendant wrongfully terminated the plaintiff's service with effect from 1-10-1954 and refused to allow the plaintiff to remain in service under the defendant any longer. Due to the wrongful conduct of the defen...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›