Kolkata Court August 1969 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Biraj Mohan Bhattacharjee Vs. Ajit Kumar Basu and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-13-1969
Reported in: AIR1971Cal266,75CWN156
Salil Kumar Datta, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant tenant against the appellate judgment and decree of affirmance in a suit for eviction.2. The plaintiff's case in brief, Is that the defendant was a monthly tenant of the suit premises under the plaintiffs, at a monthly rental of Rs. 30/-according to English calendar month. The defendant had been a defaulter in payment of rent since December, 1954 and the tenancy was determined by notice to quit dated April 23, 1956, with effect from the expiry of May 1956. As the defendant failed to vacate, the suit for khas possession of the suit premises on eviction of the defendant therefrom, was instituted on August 13, 1956.3. The defendant contested the suit filing a written statement, and he denied that he was a defaulter, as due to assertion of rival claims on the rent of the suit premises, he could not deposit rent in time. Service of notice aa also the validity and sufficiency thereof was challenged.4. The suit was tried on evidence b...
The Consolidated Tea and Lands Co. (India) Ltd., Calcutta Vs. the Comm ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-13-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Cal335,[1970]76ITR589(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. The assessee in this case is a limited company. The relevant valuation dates are November 30, 1957 and November 30, 1958 for the Wealth-tax assessment years 1958-59 and 1959-60. It appears that the assesses claimed exemption under Section 2(e)(ii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 on the value of certain alleged Dwelling houses, Store Houses and Out-houses belonging to the company. It had also claimed exemption under Section 5(1)(ix) of the same Act in respect of certain items of machinery alleged to have been used for agricultural operations conducted by the company for the purposes of growing and maintaining tea bushes as well as in respect of the values of lorries and cars claimed to have been used in connection with the raising of agricultural produce which is tea leaves in this case.2. In both the assessment years, the Wealth-tax Officer summarily rejected the claim of the assessee under both the sections. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeals before...
Corporation of Calcutta Vs. Rathi and Co. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-13-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Cal435,1970CriLJ1339,73CWN1012
Das, J.1. Criminal Appeals Nos. 655 and 656 of 1963 arise out or two orders of acquittal by a learned Presidency Magistrate under the Food Adulteration Act. The respondents are common and decisions are based on common point.2. In Criminal Appeal No. 656 of 1963, the prosecution case is that on December, 5, 1962 the Food Inspector of the Calcutta Corporation went to the godown of the accused P. C. Rathi at 8, Banstolla Lane and wanted to take samples of ghee from stock in the shop and the godown at the back of the shop. He found P. C. Rathi, respondent but he denied that the shop belonged to him and contended that the godown was an order-supplying concern, not connected with ghee business. Thereafter, respondent disappeared and could not be found. Police was posted and with the Magistrate's permission to break open the locks, the Food Inspector went to the shop at 5 p. m. on the next date and sealed the padlock. Next day i. e. 7-12-62, at about 2 p. m., he went with the Enforcement Poli...
Bijoyanand Patnaik Vs. Mrs. K.A.A. Brinnand
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-08-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Cal110,1970CriLJ332
ORDERN.C. Talukdar, J.1. This Rule is for setting aside an order dated the 24th April, 1968 passed by Sri K.J. Sengupta, Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta, holding that a prima facie case was made out against the accused-petitioner, Sri Bijoyanand Patnayah, and framing charges against him under Section 406 I. P. C. on two counts, in case No. C/1023 of 1967 and for quashing the said proceedings.2. The facts leading on to the present Rule are chequered but can be put in a short compass. The prosecution case brings to light an unfortunate case of a friendship foundering on two airships. The bone of contention between the two parties, both of whom are respectable and were erstwhile friends, is two aircrafts viz. VT-CRA & VT-CXR, which originally belonged to M/s. Indamer and Company (P) Limited, Customs House Road, Bombay. The prosecution case inter alia is that Capt. Brinnand (P. W. 4) the husband of the present complainant, Mrs. K.A.A. Brinnand (P. W. 1), purchased the abovementioned ...
Sachidananda Banerji Vs. Motichand Verma
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-07-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Cal428,1970CriLJ1334
Das, J.1. This is an appeal against an order of acquittal passed by a learned Additional Sessions Judge setting aside the order of conviction passed by a learned Magistrate, Alipur.2. The prosecution case is as follows :3. On June 19, 1959 at about 3 P. M. the respondent Moti Chand Verma arrived at Dumdum Airport by Quantas Aircraft as a passenger from Singapore. For customs checking, he was taken to the customs enclosure, where the belongings were searched by the customs staff. During the search, the customs officers found that there wasfalse bottom in the record player in his possession. This was opened and underneath was found concealed 261 wrist watches, valued at about Rs. 7630, for which 100% duty was chargeable. A complaint was filed in Court against him by the Assistant Collector of Customs and he was convicted under Section 167 (81) of the Sea Customs Act.4. The defence was a plea of innocence, upon denial that he was carrying the record player with him. He alleged that the re...
Bhikari Behara Vs. Sm. Dhanapatie Bentia
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-06-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Cal176,73CWN943
ORDERBijayesh Mukherji, J.1. This is a rule obtained under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 5 of 1908, by the judgment-debtor whose application under Section 47 ibid fails in the court of first instance and thereafter before the Full Bench of the Small Cause Court, Calcutta.2. The judgment-debtor, the petitioner before me, is a winchman working under the Calcutta Dock Labour Board. Andthe interesting question Mr. Sanyal, appearing in support of the rule, has raised is: can he be regarded as a labourer within the meaning of Section 60, Sub-section (1), Clause (h), of the Code of Civil Procedure. To the language in the statute first. The proviso to Section 60, Sub-section (1), lists properties which shall not be liable to attachment in execution of a decree. Clause (h) comes thereunder. It bears:'(h) the wages of labourers and domestic servants, whether payable in money or kind.'3. Such then is the language of the statute. Does the petitioner, a winchman under the Dock Labour ...
Shew Bhagwan Goanka Vs. the Collector of Customs and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-05-1969
Reported in: AIR1971Cal112,74CWN907
ORDERB.C. Mitra, J.1. The petitioner seeks appropriate writs and orders regarding two show cause notices dated June 24, 1966, and October 19, 1966, and an order made thereon on April 28, 1967, confiscating certain goods and imposing a fine of Rs. 50,000/- in lieu thereof and further imposing a personal penalty of Rs. 50,000/-.2. The petitioner is the Karta of a Hindu undivided family and carries on business under the name and style of East Jamuria Coal Company (hereinafter referred to as the firm) in Calcutta. The business of the firm consists in winning coal at its collieries and selling the same. For this business the firm uses various plant and machinery including Haulages headgears, drill machines etc. The petitioner obtained an actual user's Import Trade Control Licence dated January 7, 1964, under the Import and Export (Control) Act, 1947, and the Imports (Control) Order, 1955 for the import of plant, machinery and equipment of a total C.I.F. value of Rs. 66,000/-. This licence w...
imperial Tobacco Co. of India Ltd. Vs. Deputy Labour Commissioner and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-04-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Cal319
ORDERD. Basu, J.1. The Petitioner, in this Rule is the Imperial Tobacco Co. (hereinafter referred to as 'the Company'), Respondents 2-3 are its workmen. Respondent 1 is the Deputy Labour Commissioner of West Bengal and Respondent 4 is the State.2. The Company alleges that on the 12th June, 1965, the Company filed two applications under Sections 33(3) and 33(2)(b), respectively, of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), before Respondent 1, in respect of the dismissal of Respondents 2 and 3, which applications are 'still pending. The Company's case is that these two applications were filed by it under a mistake of law as to whether certain disputes between the Company and its workmen were still pending in conciliation proceedings, while, in fact, they had been concluded by settlement. Upon a dis-covery of this fact, the Company filed theapplication at Annexure C before Respondent 1 urging that he had no jurisdiction to determine the two applications u...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›