Kolkata Court June 1961 Judgments
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Himco (India) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-28-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Cal254
ORDER1. This is an application for filing an arbitration agreement and for an order of reference under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act. The arbitration agreement is a clause in the contract subsisting between the parties evidenced by the acceptance by the plaintiff of a tender submitted by the defendant. A copy of the letter of acceptance of the tender is annexed to the petition. The letter of acceptance is dated November 30, 1956 and is signed by one S.K. Dutt for and on behalf of the President of India from the Calcutta office of the Director General of Supplies and Disposals. The defendant is a company having its registered office at Bombay and the tender was sent by post from Bombay, The contract is for the supply of certain goods. The plaintiff is the buyer and the defendant the seller. It appears that the plaintiff paid and the defendant received the price of the goods sold and delivered. The defendant, however, claims that it is entitled to recover the sales tax of 5 per cent ...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Behari Ghose Vs. Union of IndiA.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-27-1961
Reported in: [1962]45ITR622(Cal)
BANERJEE J. - For the assessment year 1947-48 petitioner was assessed under the head 'capital gains', on a sum of Rs. 35,300, being the sale proceeds of premises No. 2, Sadananda Road. The tax assessed on the aforesaid sum was calculated at Rs. 2,256-13-0.For realisation of the tax as assessed, Certificate Case No. 2819-I. T. of 1951-52 was started against the petitioner before the Certificate Officer, 24-Parganas, under the provisions of the Public Demands Recovery Act read with section 46(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act.The petitioner filed a suit, being Title Suit No. 34 of 1955, in the first Court of the Subordinate Judge at Alipore, for a declaration that the assessment was illegal and also for a declaration that the certificate proceeding and the orders passed thereunder were inoperative and without jurisdiction and for an injunction restraining the opposite party herein from proceeding with the certificate. The suit succeeded to a limited extent. The learned Subordinate Judge de...
Tag this Judgment!Himangshu Bhusan Chakrabortti Vs. Nirmal Kumar Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-20-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Cal488
1. The defendant is the appellant in the second appeal. He was the Secretary of the Co-operative Urban Bank Limited, Malda. The plaintiff respondent Normal Kumar Das was a member of the above bank. The bank brought a money suit against the plaintiff Nirmal Kumar Das and another. In course of his deposition before the Court the, plaintiff is alleged to have made certain defamatory statement against the defendant Himangshu Bhusan Chakrabortti. The statement in, question was to the following effect 'Himangshu is defalcating bank money and so I am not in good feeling as I protested'. Thereafter the defendant filed a petition before the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Society, Malda, claiming damages to the tune of Rs. 5000/- on tie allegation that in course of deposition the plaintiff respondent had made a false and mischievous defamatory statement, calculated not only to lower him (defendant) in the estimation, of the public but also to bring into disrepute the bank. The matter was refe...
Tag this Judgment!Anandilal Poddar Vs. Gunendra Kr. Roy and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-19-1961
Reported in: AIR1966Cal107
ORDERA.N. Ray, J. 1. The plaintiff Anandilal Poddar instituted this suit on May 24; 1958 against Rai Bahadur Gunendra Krishna Roy and United Bank of India Ltd., for specific performance of the contract dated August 25, 1956 as modified on September 16, 1957 and for other reliefs. The contract dated August 25, 1956 was entered into between Anandilal Poddar and Rai Bahadur Gunendra Krishna Roy hereinafter referred to for the sake of brevity as Roy defendant for purchase of premises No. 57, Jatindra Mohan Avenue, Calcutta for the consideration of Rupees 6,01,000 on, inter alia, the following terms and conditions:(a) The said premises should be sold to the plaintiff free from encumbrances. (b) The sale should be completed by December 15, 1956 and in this respect time should be deemed as essence of the contract unless by mutual agreement between the plaintiff and Roy defendant such time was extended. (c) Roy defendant should give vacant possession of the said premises to the plaintiff wit...
Tag this Judgment!Himmatsinghka Timber Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-19-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Cal494
S.K. Niyogi, J.1. These three appeals are at the instance of the plaintiff M/s. Himmatsinghka Timber Ltd. and arise out of three suits for recovery of compensation from the Union of India representing the Eastern Railway and the North Eastern Railway for short delivery of goods in respect or three different consignments.2. The facts of the case about which there is no dispute may shortly be stated as follows : The Range Officer of the Forest Department, Government of Assam, at Rangapahar crossing made over three different consignment of hard wood swan timber to the North Eastern. Railway for carriage and despatch to Ultadanga Railway Station on the Eastern Railway for delivery to the consignee, namely, the plaintiff company. The first consignment consisted of 2796 pieces of timber and measured 900.16 cubic ft. and this was booked under R. R. 485790 and Invoice No. 2, bothdated 9-3-1951- The second consignment consisted of 1797 pieces of timber and measured 642.08 cubic ft. and was book...
Tag this Judgment!Dilip Nath Sen Vs. Certificate Officer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-13-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Cal346
ORDERSinha, J. 1. This is an application for review of a judgment passed herein by me on the 22nd December, 1960 by which the application was dismissed and the rule was discharged. The facts are shortly as follows: For the income-tax 'assessment year 1945-46 'Messrs. Sen and Co., Proprietor Sri Panna Lal Sen' was found liable to pay a certain sum as arrears of income-tax and a certain penalty was imposed under Section 46(1) of the Income Tax Act. Thereafter, the Income Tax Officer forwarded to the Certificate Officer, 24 Parganas, a certificate for the said amount and on the 31st March 1955 a certificate was filed by the Certificate Officer, 24 Parganas. In the certificate as filed, there was a clerical error. Notice under Section 7 of the Act was served on the certificate debtor but before he could object Panna Lal Sen died. At the instance of the heirs and legal representatives of Panna Lal Sen, the matter was adjourned from time to time and ultimately an application was made by the ...
Tag this Judgment!Niranjan Lall Agarwalla Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-09-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Cal42,65CWN876
Banerjee, J.1. On June 9, 1945, the plaintiff appellant delivered 10 boxes containing umbrellas to the Railway Administration at Sealdah for carriage by railway to Coach Behar. The consignment was accepted by the railway administration and a Railway Receipt No. 868421, dated June 9, 1945, was issued in the name of the plaintiff. At the destination there was a shortage of 104 'umbrellas detected and the delivery of the remaining boxes was made to the plaintiff with a certificate of shortage, dated July 20, 1945.2. Again on September 24, 1945, the plaintiff appellant delivered, in two consignments, 108 bales of piece goods to the railway administration at Sealdah for carriage by railway to Coochbehar. The consignment was accepted by the railway administration and Railway Receipt Nos. 701141 and 701142, both dated September 24, 1945, were issued in the name of the plaintiff. At the destination shortage of nine full bales and partial shortage in four bales were detected. Delivery of the tw...
Tag this Judgment!United Bank of India Ltd. Vs. Nederlandsche Standard Bank
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-08-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Cal325,[1963]33CompCas1(Cal)
P. B. Mukharji, J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment and decree of G.K. Mitter, J. dismissing the plaintiff's suit against the defendant for the recovery of Rs. 36,837-9-3 without costs. 2. The suit was originally instituted by the Comilla Banking Corporation Ltd. to which the present United Bank of India Limited has succeeded. The defendant is Nederlandsche Standard Bank of Amsterdam, Holland. The plaintiff's suit was based on a claim arising out of a commercial letter of credit. The facts may be briefly stated at the outset. 3. According to the plaintiff, the defendant on the 24th November 1947 under the orders of N. Jacobson and Co., of Amsterdam, opened an irrevocable and confirmed credit in terms of Letter of Credit No. 114 dated the 24th November 1947 in favour of one Herbert Joseph Corporation of Calcutta whose sole proprietor was one D.N. Sharma and the defendant advised the opening of such credit to the seller Herbert Joseph Corporation through Messrs Netherlands Trading S...
Tag this Judgment!Paresh Chandra Nath and ors. Vs. the State and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-08-1961
Reported in: 1962CriLJ654
S.K. Sen, J.1. In this revisional application the petitioners have challenged the order of a transferee Magistrate, Shri D. K. Banerjee, in summoning them Under Section 420/120B of the Indian Panal Code although in the charge-sheet they were not sent up as accused. The facts are briefly as follows:2. Opposite party No. 2, Biswanath Lai, tiled a petition of complaint against the three petitioners and against Tarapada Sadhukhan alias Nona. The learned Sub-divisional Magistrate, Barrackpore, instead of taking cognizance of the case on the complaint, directed the Officer-in-charge of Noapara police station to treat the petition of complaint as a first information report and to investigate the case. Accordingly, the police took up the investigation of the, case and ultimately submitted a charge-sheet on 26th. March 1960 against one of the accused, Tarapada Hanukah. The case was then transferred by the learned Sub-divisional Officer to Shri D. K. Banerjee, Magistrate, first Glass, for dispos...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India and Another Vs. the State and Others.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-07-1961
Reported in: [1961]42ITR753(Cal)
S. K. SEN, J. - This revisional application is directed against an order of the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta, revising an order passed by his predecessor in office allowing an application under Order XIII, rule 10, of the Civil Procedure Code for sending certain documents to the Income-tax Officer (Central) Circle No. VII, and directing the Income-tax Officer in question to indicate specifically what documents he wants for the purpose of income-tax assessment, so that the question of relevency thereof for the purpose of an assessment may be examined in the presence of all the interested parties.The facts of the case are briefly as follows : On September 15, 1959, certain books of account, documents and correspondence were seized from the firm of opposite party No. 2, Sohan Lal Sethia, on the authority of a search warrant issued by the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta, under section 19(3) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947. There was, howeveer, no case in court s...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »