Kolkata Court September 1968 Judgments
Sm. Anima Roy Vs. Probodh Mohan Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-20-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Cal304,73CWN100
Bijayesh Mukherji, J.1. This is an appeal by the wife Anima Roy, whose marriage with the respondent Probodb Mohan Roy, a learned Additional District Judge, Alipore, has declared, by his judgment and decree dated February 28, 1966, to be null and void.2. The appellant Anima and the res' pondent Probodh, Hindus both, were married under the Hindu rites on July 3 1960, when Anima was 25 and Probodh 37.3. The Hindu Marriage Act, 25 of 1955, came into force on May 18, 1955.4. Section 12, Sub-section (1), Clause (b), of the Act makes any marriage, whether solemnized before or after May 18, 1955, voidable, and provides for its annulment, by a decree of nullity, if it contravenes Section 5, Clause (ii), thereof. Section 5, Clause (ii), in turn, provides that a marriage may be solemnized between any two Hindus if neither party is an idiot or a lunatic at the time of the marriage.5. The husband respondent raises a matrimonial cause in the Court of the District Judge, Alipore, for annulling, by a ...
Tag this Judgment!Mamchand and Co. and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-19-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Cal431,[1970]76ITR217(Cal)
Sinha, C.J.1. The facts in this case are briefly as follows: Mamchand Agarwalla and Murarilal Agarwalla are two brothers. Krishna Kumar Agarwalla is the son of Mamchand Agarwalla. These three persons carry on a partnership firm under the name and style of Messrs. Mamchand and Company at No. 21-A, Canning Street, Calcutta. It is said that the partnership firm commenced from the year 1937 and its constitution was changed from time to time. The firm of Mamchand and Company is assessed in 'C' Ward District V (I). Mamchand Agarwalla and Murarilal Agarwalla in their individual capacities are assessed in 'D' Ward District V (I). Krishna Kumar Agarwalla has filed his return in his individual capacity in additional Survey, District V (I), Calcutta. Prior to 31st January, 1967 the assessment of the firm of Mamchand and Co. had been completed upto the assessment year 1963-64 and returns had been filed for the assessment years 1964-65 and 1965-66. The assessment in respect of the same has not yet ...
Tag this Judgment!Punjab National Bank Ltd. Vs. Hind Textile Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-16-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Cal390
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. This is an application by tabular statement dated 22nd February 1968 for execution of a decree by sale of certain shares. On 18th of January, 1948 the Punjab National Bank Ltd, herein referred to as the plaintiff, instituted a suit in this High Court against the Hind Textile Ltd., Nanda Kishore Jhajharia and Seth Ramdhondas Jhajharia, inter alia, for a decree for Rupees 3,64.913-8-7, for a declaration that the securities mentioned in para, 11 of the plaint are charged with the repayment with the dues of the plaintiff. On the 16th of February, 1949 a decree was passed by this High Court whereby it was decreed that the defendant. Hind Textile Ltd. and Nanda Kishore Jhajharia should pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 3,64,913-8-9 with an interest therein at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of the decree until realisation and it was further ordered and decreed that the securities mentioned in paragraph 11 of the plaint should be charged with the repay...
Tag this Judgment!Ramji Dayawahla and Sons Private Ltd. Vs. Invest Import
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-13-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Cal253,73CWN533
Bijayesh Mukherji, J. 1. The unsuccessful appellant craves a certificate under Article 133, sub-article (1) of the Constitution for appeal to the Supreme Court.2. The appellant's is a suit, alleging breaches of contracts, one of which is written and the rest are parol, and claiming recovery of Rs. 4,25,343.00. A.N. Ray, J., stays the suit and all proceedings thereunder, because of the written contract's arbitration clause which bears:'Any mutual dispute should be settled in mutual agreement; however, both the contracting parties accept the jurisdiction of the Arbitration by the International Chamber of Commerce in Paris with application of Yugoslav materials and economical law.'The learned Judge dismisses too the appellant's application for injunction restraining the respondent from withdrawing from the Bihar State Electricity Board any money, without keeping a balance of Rs. 4,40,000. The appeals taken against the aforesaid two orders fail. Hence this application for the grant of a ce...
Tag this Judgment!Gillanders Arbuthnot and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-13-1968
Reported in: [1970]76ITR160(Cal)
Chatterjee, J.1. This is a reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, The assessee is a firm. Till the end of February, 1947, the firm consisted of four partners. Under a deed of partnership, dated February 28, 1947, Messrs. Gillanders Arbuthnot & Co. Ltd. was admitted into the partnership. This company was floated in 1935 ; but it did little business. The said limited company purchased from the then partners of the assessee-firm certain specified shares and securities of the assessee-firm for a sum of Rs. 75,00,000 ; on payment of a further sum of Rs. 14,90,000 the said limited company was admitted as a partner of the firm, the shares of the company in the goodwill and in the profits of the firm being 99%, The partners of the firm and the shareholders of the company were the same.2. The aforesaid sum was agreed to be satisfied by allotment of 64,900 ordinary shares of Rs. 100 each, to the then partners and a further allotment of 25,000 redeemable, cumulative and...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. W.J. Shepherd
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-09-1968
Reported in: [1969]74ITR79(Cal)
Chatterjee, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The reference is at the instance of the department. The assessee is an employee of Messrs. Avery Co. of India (Pr.) Ltd. There is an agreement between the assessee employee and his employer, Messrs. Avery Co. of India (Pr.) Ltd., which is described in a scheme made by Messrs. Avery Co. of India. We may put the scheme in the following manner: (1) In case the employee dies before his retirement a cash payment of a stipulated sum would be paid by his employer, M/s. Avery Co. of India (Pr.) Ltd. (2) In case he survives up to his retirement age of 55, he will be entitled to participate in a scheme for pension and he would get his pension at a stipulated figure from the date of his retirement till his death provided that in case the employee dies within 5 years of his retirement the pension would, notwithstanding such death, continue to be payable for 5 years from the date of retirement. 2. The emp...
Tag this Judgment!Dhirendra Nath Sen and ors. Vs. Smt. Santasila Debi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-05-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Cal406
Sinha, C.J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment and order of Masud J. dated 14-9-1967. The facts are briefly as follows: By an order dated November 29, 1954 certain disputes were referred to sole arbitration of the late Dr. Radhabinod Pal. On May 27, 1955, the arbitrator made his award. Judgment on award was passed on May 22, 1956. The award related to the adjudication of certain disputes between members of the same family. The relevant clause in the said award is Clause (10) which runs as follows:'10 (a) That 1. Sri Dhirendra Nath Sen 2. Sri Priya Nath Sen 3. Sri Anadi Nath Sen 4. Sri Jitendra Nath Sen 5. Sri Satyendra Nath Sen 6. Sri Fanindra Nath Sen 7. Sri Rabindra Nath Sen shall each pay severally to Smt. Santasila Debi the sum of Rs. 5000 (five thousand) each (in all Rs. 35000 thirty five thousand) in full satisfaction of her claim to the dividends from the New India Glass Works (Calcutta) Ltd., upto the close of the year 1945-46 as also in full discharge of her claim ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›