Kolkata Court March 1969 Judgments
Bar, Das, Dey and Co. Vs. Sri Sri Ishwar Tarakeshwar Sib Thakur Jiu, S ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-1969
Reported in: AIR1969Cal565,73CWN920
S.N. Bagchi, J. 1. This Second Appeal is at the instance of the defendants in Title Suit No. 37 of 1960 of the Court of the Second Munsif, Chandernagore. The plaintiff proceeded with the following case. The plaintiff is Sri Sri Iswar Tarakeswar Sib Thakur Jiu respectively (sic represented?) by She-bait Mohant Srimat Dandiswami Hrishikesh Asram. The defendants are Bar, Das, Dey & Co. proprietors of the same being GOUR Chandra Bar, Batakrishna Dey and Bijay Basanta Das. The defendants are alleged to have executed an agreement in favour of the plaintiff to take out sand up to 1365 B. S. from plot Nos. 689, 797, 530, 563/1109 comprising 8.86 acres equal to 27 bighas of land situate in Mouza Baligari recorded in Khatian Nos. 27, 23 and 24. The right to take the sand from the aforesaid land under the agreement was to be effective up to 1365 B.S. on payment of the plaintiff Rs. 66 per annum said to be the license fees. The defendants shall have no other concern with the land which shall alway...
Tag this Judgment!Sunil Kumar Chowdhary and anr. Vs. Sm. Satirani Chowdhary and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1969
Reported in: AIR1969Cal573,73CWN721
S.K. Chakravarti, J. 1. These arc two appeals, one by the husband against an order of the learned Additional District Judge, Alipore by which he dismissed the petitioner-appellant's application for judicial separation from his wife the respondent and the other by the wife against an order passed by the learned District Judge, Howrah by which he allowed the application of the husband for custody of the child of the marriage.2. The parties are Hindus and were married on April 22, 1960 according to Hindu religious rites and a male child was born on February 9, 1961. They lived together till the 1st of March 1962 since when they have been living apart.3. The petitioner husband's case is that his wife the respondent was haughty and temperamental as her parents were wealthy and she wanted him to live in her father's house at Salkia and as the petitioner refused to do it, she ultimately left his house on the 1st of March 1962 without any cause whatsoever. His further case is to the effect tha...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shalimar Works Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-10-1969
Reported in: [1971]79ITR21(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. This reference arises out of the assessment for the assessment year 1959-60, for which the relevant previous year is the calendar year 1958. The assessee is a resident company. The original assessment' was made on the 30th October, 1959, on a total income of Rs. 12,28,734. This income was subsequently reduced in appeal. Thereafter, the Income-tax Officer found that the profits made by the assessee in the United Kingdom, in so far as they had been exempted under the third proviso to Section 4(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, during the assessment years 1939-40 to 1958-59, amounting to Rs. 90,000, had been remitted into India in the previous year. The Income-tax Officer, therefore, reopened the proceedings of the relevant assessment year under Section 34 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. In the course of reassessment proceedings the assessee submitted that the income which had accrued in the United Kingdom during the assessment years 1939-40 to 1958-59 w...
Tag this Judgment!New Central Jute Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Dy. Secretary, Ministry of Finance ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-07-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Cal183,73CWN557
Sinha, C.J.1. The appellant in this case is Messrs. New Central Jute Mills Co. Ltd. which is a public limited company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1913 (hereinafter referred to as the 'appellant') and is an existing company under the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act') having its registered office at 11, Clive Row, Calcutta. It carries on business inter alia as manufacturers of Jute goods, chemicals and fertilizers. It owns two jute mills called Albion Jute Mills and Lothian Jute Mills situate at Budge Budge, West Bengal. It owns a factory at Varanasi known as Sahu Chemicals & Fertilizers in which soda ash and ammonium chloride are produced.2. Messrs. Sahu Jain Ltd. of 11 Clive Row, Calcutta was at all material times and still are the managing agents of the appellant. The authorised capital of the appellant is rupees five crores divided into 30,00,000 ordinary shares of Rs. 10/-each and 20,00,000 preference snares of Rs. 100/- each. The paid-...
Tag this Judgment!Aswini Kumar Dey and anr. Vs. Sm. Angur Bala Kundu and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-07-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Cal285
S.K. Datta, J. 1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs against the appellate judgment and decree of affirmance dismissing their suit for khas possession and injunction.2. The material facts alleged by the plaintiffs are as follows:(a) The suit land with an area of .06 decimal is comprised in Dag No, 2062 of Khatian No. 1114 under Khatian No. 1113 in Mouja Santragachi, Police Station-Jogacha, in the district of Howrah.(b) One Subodh Chandra Kundu had an occupancy raiyati jama of Rs. 15 appertaining to the said Khatian No. 1113, Mouja Santragachi under Hemangini Dasi. One Harimati Dasi took a bemiadi settlement from Subodh Chandra Kundu by a bemiadi kabuliyat dated January 5, 1937 (Exhibit 3) of 2 cottahs of Bastui land at a jama of Rs. 4 only and had been in possession by constructing kutcha structures thereon.(c) Due to the illness since 1937, Subodh could not attend the district settlement operations and in his absence Harimati and her son Kabul Chandra Malik (Defendant No. 2) caused i...
Tag this Judgment!Associated Electrical Industries Manufacturing Co. Private Ltd. Vs. Fi ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-07-1969
Reported in: AIR1969Cal542,74CWN892
ORDERA.K. Mukherjea, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing an order of reference made under the Industrial Disputes Act as well as all proceedings relating to the said order. The facts and circumstances of the case are shortly as follows: The petitioner is a private limited company and is a manufacturer of diverse kinds of electrical and allied goods. There are two registered Trade Unions of the workers of the petitioner company; one of them is known as the Staff Union and the other as the Workers' Union. The petitioner's workmen are either monthly rated or hourly-rated. In 1959 the petitioner paid ex gratia to its hourly-rated as well as monthly-rated workmen a sum equivalent to 1/8th of the basic wages earned by a workman as bonus for the year 1958. On August 25, 1960 the workers' Union demanded 3 months' basic wages as bonus for 1959; the Staff Union made no such demand. According to the petitioner, the profits made by the company du...
Tag this Judgment!Mohta Bros. (P.) Ltd. and ors. Vs. Calcutta Landing and Shipping Co. L ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-07-1969
Reported in: [1970]40CompCas119(Cal),73CWN425
B.C. Mitra, J.1. The appellants made an application under Sections 397, 398 and 402 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act '). The company, in regard to whose affairs this application was made is Calcutta Landing and Shipping Company Ltd. (respondent No. 1). The main business of the company was shipping, landing and carrying of cargo. The four appellants hold among them more than 1/10th of the issued share capital of the respondent No. 1. Gladstone Lyall and Company Ltd. were appointed managing agent of respondent No. 1 on or about August 16, 1960, and held 19,705 shares in the capital of the company. Various charges of mismanagement, manipulation of dividend, misfeasance and oppression were laid in the petition. The application was dismissed by a judgement and order dated September 21, 1962, and hence this appeal.2. In the court below various allegations against management of respondent No. 1 and also various charges laid in the petition were canvassed, but in...
Tag this Judgment!Deoria Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-06-1969
Reported in: [1970]77ITR834(Cal)
Sankar Prasad Mitra, J.1. This is a reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The assessment year is 1958-59. The relevant previous year is the year which ended on the 31st August, 1957. The assessee carried on business in the manufacture and sale of sugar. It had its mill at Deoria, Uttar Pradesh, and its registered office at Calcutta. For the assessment year 1958-59, by its letter dated 25th November, 1961, the assessee claimed a deduction of Rs. 34,355 as interest paid for arrears of sugarcane cess under the Uttar Pradesh Sugarcane Cess Act, 1956.2. The Income-tax Officer rejected this claim. His first ground was that the liability related to the assessee's accounting year which ended on the 31st August, 1957, and the assessee had not made any provisions for the said sum in its accounts for that year though the assessee's method of accounting was mercantile. Secondly, he said that the amount in question was not allowable as a deduction since it was penal in n...
Tag this Judgment!Narendra Sharma Vs. Income-tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-05-1969
Reported in: [1970]75ITR781(Cal)
T.K. Basu, J.1. The petitioner, Narendra Sharma, was assessed to income-tax for the assessment year 1961-62 by the Income-tax Officer, Central Circle XV, Calcutta. Although the order of assessment was passed on the 24th March, 1966, it was made under the provisions of Section 23(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the repealed Act'). It is not disputed that all the notices issued to the petitioner by the appropriate Income-tax Officer in connection with the aforesaid assesement proceedings, were also issued under the provisions of the repealed Act.2. On the 23rd March, 1966, the said Income-tax Officer issued two notices on the petitioner proposing to initiate proceedings for imposition of penalty under the provisions of Section 274 read with Section 271 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').3. The said two notices are set out hereinbelow :'Notice under Section 274 read with Section 271 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. CC.XV/34-S/...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›