Kolkata Court September 1961 Judgments
Lotus Oil Company Vs. Calcutta Soap Works
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-29-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Cal441
ORDERG.K. Mitter, J. 1. This is an application to set aside an award of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce and Industry on two grounds, the first being that there was no dispute between the parties which could be referred to the said Chamber for arbitration. The second ground taken is that the contract being a forward contract within the meaning and definition of the expression in the Forward Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1952 was illegal inasmuch as it contravened the notification of the Central Government dated January 25, 1955, by virtue of which no such contract could be entered into in respect of the goods specified in the schedule including groundnut oil except with the permission of the said Government.2. The contract between the parties was entered into on November, 24, 1959, by exchange of bought and sold notes by brokers K.D. More and Co. The relevant clauses of the sold note are as follows:-Articles : -Groundnut Oil.Rate :Rs. 59.19 pp. per md. loosefree delivered to buyer's factor...
Tag this Judgment!The Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs, W. Bengal Vs. Ne ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-29-1961
Reported in: AIR1963Cal508,1963CriLJ258
S.K. Sen, J. 1. This is an appeal by the Legal Remembrancer, Gov-ernment of West Bengal on behalf of the State of West Bengal against an order by Shri S. K. Chakravarti, Sessions Judge, Murshidabad acquitting the respondent Nesaruddin snaikh in respect of a charge under Section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 on a preliminary point of law. The respondent was committed for trial to the Court of the Sessions Judge, Murshidabad under Section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, the allegation against him being that on 19th December, 1956 six country-made throw-down crackers dangerous to life were found in the possession ot the respondent. When the case came up for trial before the learned Sessions Judge, a preliminary objection on a point of law was taken, that as consent under Section 7 of the Explosive Substances Act had been given by the State Government and not by the Central Government as required by the Section, the trial could not proceed, me learned Judge accepted this...
Tag this Judgment!Marwari Mills Stores Co. Vs. A.K. Bandopadhyay and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-28-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Cal180,66CWN170
ORDERD.N. Sinha, J.1. The facts in this case are shortly as follows: The petitioner firm carries on business in the importation of diverse Mill Stores and Accessories, On or about the 19th December, 1958 and 31st December, 1958 respectively the petitioner was granted two Import Licences by the Joint Chief Controller of Exports and Imports Calcutta. By the said licences, the petitioner was authorised to import spare parts of jute mill machinery as per lists attached thereto.under Sl. No. 37 (2) of Part II of the Import Trade (Control) Schedule, valid from October, 1958 to March, 1959. The petitioner was thereby authorised to import spares, components and parts of jute mill machinery falling under Sl. No. 37 (2) but excluding components for machinery included in Appendix XXXV of the said schedule, and Sl. 68 in part V. In September. 1960 the petitioner imported certain Cork Covers for jute mill machinery ex. S. S. Alwaki, from Germany. According to the petitioner, the goods imported were...
Tag this Judgment!Calcutta Hospital and Nursing Home Benefits Association Ltd., Calcutta ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-1961
Reported in: AIR1963Cal598,[1963]47ITR247(Cal)
P.B. Mukharji, J.1. Has Parliament succeeded in bringing 'Surplus' of a mutual insurance besiness not dealing with life, within the impact of Income-tax, is the main question in this Income-tax Reference.2. This reference is made by the Tribunal under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act at the instance of the assessee, the Calcutta Hospital and Nursing Home Benefits Association Ltd., for the determination by this Court of the following questions of law:1. Whether the profit arising to the assessee company from miscellaneous insurance transactions of mutual character was assessable under the Indian Income-tax Act. 2. If the answer to question No. 1 is in the affirmative whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the balance of the profits as disclosed in the assessee company's profit and loss account after deducting the various reserves should be taxable profits within the meaning of Section 2(6C) read with Rule 6 of the Schedule of the Indian Income-tax Act.3. The...
Tag this Judgment!Kohinoor Pictures (Private), Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-21-1961
Reported in: (1961)IILLJ741Cal
Sinha, J.1. The petitioner in this case is a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act and carries on business as a distributor of cinematographic films. The Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (11 of 1948) (hereinafter referred, to as the 'said Act') is a Central Act to provide for the fixation of minimum rates of wages in certain employments. It came into operation from 15 March 1948. Under Clause (g) of Section 2, 'scheduled employment means an employment specified in the schedule to the Act or any process or branch of work forming part of such employment. Clause (h) defines 'wages' to mean all remuneration, capable of being expressed in terms of money. Certain amenities, however, specified therein, have been excluded. Under Clause (i), the word 'employee' has been defined to mean any person who is employed for hire or reward to do any work, skilled or unskilled, manual or clerical, in a scheduled employment in respect of which minimum rates of wages have been fixed. Under Section 3, ...
Tag this Judgment!S. Venkatesan and anr. Vs. Nihalchand Agarwala and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-20-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Cal258,66CWN501
Debabrata Mookerjee, J.1. This appeal is brought from an order of Sinha J. dated June 11, 1959, whereby certain proceedings commenced by a notice or a letter issued by the Additional Collector of Customs dated September 15, 1958, were quashed by a writ in the nature of certiorari and a mandamus issued directing the Customs authorities not to give effect to the notice. The Additional Collector of Customs has accordingly appealed.2. The respondents, Nihalchand Agarwala and others, are a firm, carrying on business, under the name and style of Keshrichand Nihalchand, of importing betelnuts from eastern countries. They had an import licence valid upto the 30th of September 1957 which authorised them to import betelnuts worth about Rs. 24800/- and odd. The firm had entered into an agreement with T.N. Sharma Ltd. of Penang for supply of 80 bags of betelnuts, the total value of which was Rs. 10,322 52 nP. A consignment was booked by S.S. Noreverett and the freight was insured with the National...
Tag this Judgment!Bal Kissen Kejriwal Vs. Collector of Customs and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-19-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Cal460
Debabrata Mookerjee, J.1. This appeal is brought from an order of P.B. Mukharji, J., dated January 22, 1958, (See : AIR1959Cal533 ) dismissing an application under Article 226 of the Constitution and discharging a Rule Nisi requiring the respondents to show cause why a penalty of Rs. 30,000/- imposed on the appellant under Section 167 (8) of the Sea Customs Act should not be set aside or quashed.2. The appellant is a son of one Kanaiyalal Kejriwal, a Director of the Firm of Palriwala Brothers Limited. It is said that the appellant signed several shipping documents as export superintendent, and was thus concerned in, an attempted illegal exportation of groundnut oil cakes, mis-described as sesame oil cakes by the said Palriwala Brothers.3. Proceedings were accordingly taken against the appellant by the Customs authorities which terminated in the imposition of the personal penalty referred to above by' S.K. Srivastava, Additional Collector of Customs, on June 19, 1956.4. The said order o...
Tag this Judgment!Sen Raleigh Industries of India Ltd. Vs. Fifth Industrial Tribunal and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-19-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Cal445,[1961(3)FLR399],(1962)ILLJ187Cal
ORDERB.N. Banerjee, J. 1. By an order, dated December 20, 1956, (amended by several subsequent corrigenda), the respondent State Government had referred certain industrial disuses, concerning the engineering industry in general, to the Fifth Industrial Tribunal. The petitioner company was a party to the industrial adjudication.2. During the pendency of the industrial adjudication, the respondent No. 3, who had been put on 'idle time' on account of the break-down of the machine in which he was working and who did not approach the authorities for alternative work as he was required to do, was charged with misconduct and was served with a charge-sheet; dated November 29, 1957/December 2, 1957, to the following effect:'It is evident from the record that you remained idle for six working days with effect from 8-11-57 and did not report to your Foreman for allotment of job.On 15-11-57 at about .12 p. m. you approached to Mr. A.M. Ghose, Deptt. Foreman for Canteen meal Token and in spite of h...
Tag this Judgment!Sarker Bakery Vs. Authority Under the Payment of Wages Act and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-18-1961
Reported in: (1962)ILLJ183Cal
B.N. Banerjee, J.1. The petitioner firm carries on business as a baker of loaves of bread and of biscuits and has its bakery at 7/1, Gas Street, Calcutta. The respondent 2, Sk. Pir Ali, used to work as a workman in the bakery of the petitioner firm. He was discharged from service without notice. For unpaid wages for the period December 1957 to 28 January 1958, the petitioner claimed a sum of Rs. 95-1-0 and also a further sum of Rs. 50 as a month's pay in lieu of notice. For recovery of the aforesaid sums he started a proceeding before the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act (IV of 1936).2. Amongst other points taken in defence, the petitioner firm took the point that it was not a factory and as such the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act (IV of 1936) had no jurisdiction over itself.3. The evidence adduced before the Authority established that about 23 or 24 persons worked in the bakery and all the operations therein were performed by manual labour.4. The Authority, however, ...
Tag this Judgment!James Alexander and Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central, ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-12-1961
Reported in: [1963]49ITR82(Cal)
P. B. MUKHARJI J. - The assessees only objection is that it is a company in which the public are substantially interested and therefore section 23A of the Income-tax Act cannot be applied to it.This is a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act at the instance of the applicant. Messrs. James Alexander & Co. Ltd., the assessee, for the decision of this court on the following questions of law :'(1) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of this case, the firm of Soorajmull Nagermull was not a member of the public within the meaning of section 23 ?(2) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of this case, the group of individuals consisting of the partners of Surajmull Nagermull and the wives of the of the partners held more than seventy five per cent. of the shares of the assessee compan ?(3) In the circumstances, whether the provisions of section 23A were applicable in this cas ?'The assessee is a public company. The assessment year under consideration is 1949-50 and t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »