Kolkata Court July 1963 Judgments
Suren Banerjee Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-30-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Cal220,1964CriLJ514,68CWN487
Debabrata Mookerjee, J.1. The petitioner Suren Banerjee is being prosecuted under Rule 41(5) of the Defence of India Rules, He prays that in the circumstances that have happened he is entitled to be released on bail. The contention requires examination.2. The proceedings against him originated in a police report. On the 19th of April, 1963 he was charged under Section 11 of the West Bengal Security Act read with R. 41 of the Defence of India Rules, 1962, with having between 21st October 1962 and 21st November, 1962, been engaged in 'subversive and prejudicial activities affecting the safety and security of the State'. This charge was altered on the 4th May 1963 and the petitioner was charged in the alternative, under Section 11 of the West Bengal Security Act and R. 41 of the Defence of India Rules 1962. The dates of commission of the offence as previously charged were also altered. It appears that on the last-mentioned date two sets of charges were adopted. Thereafter, on the 27th Jun...
Tag this Judgment!Chaturbhuj Sohanlal Vs. Clive Mills Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-30-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Cal241
Sinha, J. 1. This is an appeal against an order made by Mitter, J., dated 1st May, 1961 whereby he dismissed an application made on behalf of the respondent, under Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act for setting aside a decree made in terms of an award made in Case No. 249 of 1949 of the Tribunal of Arbitration, Bengal Chamber of Commerce. The facts are briefly as follows: The appellant before us, the petitioner in the said application, is a partnership firm, of which the partners are Sohanlal Ruia and Iswari Prosad Ruia. By a contract in writing No. 46/A dated 29th March 1946 entered into between the appellant firm and the respondent company, Messrs. Clive Mills, Co. Ltd. the appellant sold and the respondent bought, 2000 mda of jute on terms and conditions mentioned in the said contract, which was in the prevailing contract form of the Indian Jute Mills Association. The said contract contained the usual arbitration clause whereby all disputes and differences were to be referred to t...
Tag this Judgment!Suresh Chandra Roy Vs. the Land Acquisition Collector, Chinsurah
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-29-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Cal283
ORDERB.N. Banerjee, J. 1. An area of land belonging to the petitioner was acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act and two sums of money, namely, Rs. 57,236.65 nP. and Rs. 33.413,25 nP. ware awarded in favour of the petitioner. On July 9, 1958 the petitioner was informed that he was at liberty to withdraw the amounts on August 18, 1958. either himself or through an authorised agent from the Land Acquisition Collector's Office. On receipt of the above notice, the petitioner made an application, on July 18, 1958, praying that a reference be made to Court for determination of the amount of compensation. In the said application the petitioner, inter alia, stated that he would receive the compensation as awarded under protest on the date notified. 2. Thereafter, on August 12, 1958, the petitioner filed an application before the Land Acquisition Collector for withdrawal of the compensation money and therein authorised Sri Phanindra Nath Chakrabarty to receive the compensatio...
Tag this Judgment!E.S. Olpadvala Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax CalcuttA.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-26-1963
Reported in: [1964]54ITR440(Cal)
SANKAR PRASAD MITRA J. - This is reference under section 66(I) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The assessment year in 1957-1958. The corresponding accounting year is the calendar year 1956. The assessee, E. S. Olpadvala, was the sole proprietor of a business in the manufacture and sale of aerated and miner water carried n by him under the name and style of Byron & Co. at No,. 5, Chowringhee Place, Calcutta. The premises were owned by the assessee, who transferred it by a deep dated December 30, 1955, to 4 several persons, being his sister, brothers and nephew. The consideration for the transfer was the payment of an annuity of Rs. 6,000 per annum to the assessees wife The market value of the property is said to have been Rs. 2,30,000 but in the deed to conveyance, for the purposes of stamp duty, the property was valued under section 25(c) of the Indian Stamp Act at 12 times the annuity recited in the document. I shall discuss the relevant clauses of this document later in this judg...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Alliance Assurance Co. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-25-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Cal31
Bachawat, J.1. On the 7th June, 1954 the defendant No. 2 made over to the Eastern Railway administration represented by the defendant No. 1, 546 packages of tyres, rubber-goods and accessories for carriage from Bansbati, a station on the Eastern Railway to Lucknow, a station on the Northern Railways. The Eastern Railway administration accepted the goods for carriage and delivery to the defendant No. 2 at Lucknow. The goods were short delivered and a shortage certificate was issued to the defendant No. 2. The goods had been insured by the defendant No. 2 under an insurance policy dated the 6th August, 1951 issued by the plaintiff against risk of loss or damage whilst being conveyed by train or other conveyance including risks of theft, pilferage and non-delivery. Having regard to the shortage certificate, the plaintiff, as insurer of the goods, paid to the defendant No. 2 the value of the goods short delivered amounting to Rs. 3262/11/-. On the and August, 1954, in consideration of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Satyendu Kundu Vs. Amar Nath Ghosh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-25-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Cal52
Sinha, J.1. This is an appeal against an order of the learned additional District Judge, Howrah, affirming an order of the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Howrah, made under Section 4 of the Partition Act IV of 1893. (hereinafter referred to as the 'Said Act'). The facts in this case are briefly as follows: One Debendra Nath Ghosh became the owner of house and premises No. 154, Panchanantola Road, at present known as premises No. 74, Deshpran Sashmal Road, Howrah. The house is two-storeyed, situated on land of the area of about 1 cottah 14 chitlahs. There are two big rooms and one small room on the first floor and a corresponding number of rooms with one verandah on the ground floor. It is necessary here to set out the genealogical table of Debendra Nath Ghosh and his descendents. DEBENDRA NATH GHOSH = UMASHASHI _______________________________________________|_(d/-I8-2-57)__________________________________________ Jnanandra Swarna Sen Kamala Bimala Roy Reba Paral Amain Mitra | (p...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) Vs. the East Bengal River Steamer Service Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-25-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Cal196
Mukherjea, J. 1. This is an appeal from a judgment and decree dated 12th May, 1958 of Datta, J. the tacts of the case are quite simple and may be briefly set out as follows:-- 2. The plaintiff Company are the owners of a tug or vessel called 'Madanmonan'. On or at-cut February 28, 1944 the plaintiff company were served with a letter issued by the Regional Controller of Priorities (River) of the then Government of India enclosing copy of an order of the said Government. The order was No. 294 of 19th February, 1944 passed under Sub-rule (2) read with Sub-rule (5) of Rule 89 of the Defence of India Rules. This order is the foundation of the plaintiff's claims and should therefore be set out in extenso:-- 'In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-rule (2) read with Sub-rule (5) of the Rule 89 of the Defence of India Rules, the Central Government is pleased to order that the Companies specified in the schedule hereto annexed snail comply with any directions given from time to time by the ...
Tag this Judgment!Birds Investments Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-23-1963
Reported in: [1965]35CompCas143(Cal),[1965]55ITR284(Cal)
Sen, J. 1. In this reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, hereinafter described as the ' Act', the following questions have been raised for the opinion of this court:'(1) Whether the Income-tax Officer had jurisdiction to make a supplementary assessment for 1946-47, under Section 34 by proceeding under that section as amended in 1948 (2) Whether Section 31 of the Indian Income-tax (Amendment) Act (XXV of 1953) has the effect of making Section 34 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, as amended in 1948, retrospective (3) Whether the supplementary assessment in this case is barred by limitation (4) Whether, in the circumstances of this case, the submission by the assessee of the reconciliation of capital reserve account (annexure marked ' C'), amounted to a full and true disclosure of all the material facts necessary for his assessment within the meaning of Section 34(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, as amended in 1948 (5) Whether, in the circumstances ...
Tag this Judgment!The Indian Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Treogi Nath and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Cal102
Mitter, J. 1. This is an appeal from an order making absolute Rule directing the Second Labour Court to hear and determine an application presented to it under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. 2. The matter arises thus: By an award of the Fifth industrial Tribunal published on September 19, 1959 forty one persons, the petitioners before this Court, who had been dismissed from service by the two respondent companies were directed to be reinstated in service and held entitled to half their salary for the entire period from October 2, 1953 to the date of their actual return to duty after the award. The respondent companies appealed unsuccessfully first to the Appellate Tribunal and then to the Supreme Court. Orders for stay of operation of the award obtained by them during the pendency of the appeals were ultimately vacated on October 15, 1957. According to the petitioners they had offered to resume their duties immediately after the publication of the award of the Fifth In...
Tag this Judgment!Patent and Trade Mark Agencies Employees Union Vs. William Frederic De ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-19-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Cal80
Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal from an order making absolute a Rule obtained by two persons W. F. Depending and B. A. E. Depenning who practise the profession of Patent and Trade Mark Agents in partnership against the Third Industrial Tribunal of West Bengal, the Patent and Trade Mark Agencies Employees' Union, the employees of Depenning and Depenning represented by Patent and Trade Mark Agencies Employees' Union and the State of West Bengal directing the issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to give effect to the order of reference dated January 4, 1958, made by the State of West Bengal referring certain disputes between the De Pennings on the one hand and their employees on the other represented by the said Union.2. According to the De Pennings the practice of the profession of Patent and Trade Mark Agents is not an industry within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947 and the persons employed by them are not and cannot be workmen withi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »