Kolkata Court November 1970 Judgments
Heavy Engineering Corporation Ltd. Vs. Crompton Greaves Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-25-1970
Reported in: AIR1972Cal217
ORDERS.C. Ghose, J. 1. This is an application made by Heavy Engineering Corp. Ltd. inter alia for stay of the Suit No. 2388 of 1968 (Crompton Greaves Ltd. v. Heavy Engineering Corporation Ltd.) and all proceedings thereunder. On or about 4th October, 1963, the applicant issued a notice bearing No. 4/FF/63 inviting tender for the supply of a Transformer. Switch-gear, Circuit Breaker. Isolator. Sele-nium Rectifier Panel etc. It is alleged that pursuant to the said invitation to tender the respondent's predecessor, one Greaves Cotton Crompton Parkinson Ltd. submitted a tender bearing No. AQ/P7210/ SED for the supply of a Transformer. The said tender was accepted. It is alleged by the respondent that the said invitation to tender contained a pamphlet which contained certain special conditions. The respondent alleges that the respondent's predecessor submitted the said tender subject to the said special conditions. The said tender, however, was accepted by the petitioner by a letter dated 2...
Tag this Judgment!Soumendra Kumar Dutta and anr. Vs. Sree Sridhar Jew and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-25-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Cal264
ORDERS.C. Ghose, J.1. This is an application by plaintiff for an injunction restraining the defendant No. 9 from constructing or continuing the construction on the eastern portion and courtyard of the premises No. 89, Burtolla street, in Calcutta within the said jurisdiction. According to the plaintiff, the plaintiff is the owner of an undivided l/4th share of the said premises. The defendant No. 10 is also the owner of an undivided 1/4th share and the defendant No. 1 is the owner of an undivided 1/2 share of the said premises. The defendants Nos. 2 to 8 are shebaits and/or trustees to the said estate of the defendant No. 1.2. The defendant No. 9 is the lessee under an instrument of lease of the eastern portion of the said property for a period of 50 years with the option to extend the same for a further period of 25 years. The defendant No. 9, according to the plaintiff has been causing constructions to be made on the eastern portion of the said property to the detriment and prejudice...
Tag this Judgment!Swaika Oil Mills Vs. Member, Board of Revenue
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-25-1970
Reported in: [1971]27STC218(Cal)
Sankar Prasad Mitra, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 21(1) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941. The applicant is a registered dealer under the Act. The assessment is for the period of four quarters ending on 1st Ashar Sudi 2010. During this period, according to the statement of the case, Messrs Netherland Selling Organisation Ltd. had entered into an agreement with the applicant for purchase of linseed oil on f.o.b. Calcutta terms. The purchasers agreed to insure the goods. The payment was to be made against the first presentation of 'clean on board' mate's receipt along with the relevant G.R. 1 forms in triplicate. A copy of the relevant document has been produced before us on behalf of the department and has been kept in the records of this reference by consent of parties. This is a letter addressed by Netherland Selling Organisation Ltd. to the applicant containing the terms and conditions of the agreement which the applicant was invited to accept. From this letter a...
Tag this Judgment!Sm. Lakshmi Bala Chanak Vs. Brojendra Nath PaIn and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-20-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Cal243
ORDERAmiya Kumar Mookerji, J.1. This Rule was obtained by the plaintiff and it is directed against an order of the learned Munsif dismissing the petitioner's application under Section 151, Civil Procedure Code, praying for extending the time to make the deposit in terms of a decree for specific performance of a contract under certain circumstances.2. The facts that lie in a short compass may be stated as follows:--3. On March 2, 1028 by a registered Kobala, the petitioner purchased from her mother with her 'Stridhan' .28 decimal of land in Dag No. 801, appertaining to Khatian No. 422 of Mouza Benai within the Midnapore Collectorate, in the name of her husband. On or about 1st December, 1959, the petitioner took a loan of Rs. 800/- from the opposite party No. 1, on executing a sale deed in respect of the above land in favour of the said opposite party No. 1, who executed an agreement of reconveyance of the said property in favour of the petitioner, on condition, that the said sum of Rs....
Tag this Judgment!Aswini Kumar Roy and anr. Vs. Kshitish Chandra Sen Gupta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-20-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Cal252
S.N. Bagchi, J.1. This appeal at the instance of the defendants 1 and 2 is against the decree passed in Title Suit No. 1145 of 1960 of the first court of the Munsif at Sealdah.2. Mr. Guha, the learned counsel for the appellants-defendants in this second appeal which arises out of the Title Appeal No. 151 of 1963 has very rightly taken only one ground and that is a ground of law. Mr. Guha submitted that if the learned appellate court found that Jan Md. left three daughters, the entire suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession against his clients must fail. There is a cross-objection at the instance of the plaintiffs wherein it is stated that the finding of the appellate court that Jan Md. left three daughters was not correct.3. Let me now come into the details of the suit. There are two plaintiffs, Kshitish Chandra Sen Gupta and Sm. Kusum Kumari Nath and there are several defendants of which defendants 1 and 2 Aswini and Ram Nath are the appellants. The plaintiffs started...
Tag this Judgment!Laxmipat Choraria Vs. K.K. Ganguli and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-20-1970
Reported in: [1971]82ITR306(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. One Laxmipat Choraria was apprehended by the customs officials at the Palam Airport at Delhi, coming by an internal flight on the 13th January, 1967, with Rs. 3,60,000. Thereafter, the residence and the office premises of the Chorarias were searched by the Bombay customs authorities the same evening. As result of the search Indian currency notes amounting to Rs. 8,700 were recovered from the residence of Laxmipat Choraria and currency notes amounting to Rs. 34,074 were recovered from the office premises at Bombay. The searches were in pursuance of Section 105 of the Customs Act, 1962. The said search was conducted by the customs authorities under the reasonable belief that the moneys in the hands of the Chorarias represented the sales proceeds of smuggled goods. During the search it appears that the officers of the income-tax department were also present. On the 14th February, 1967, the income-tax authorities in Bombay served a warrant of authorisation under ...
Tag this Judgment!Birati Weaving Factory and ors. Vs. Employees State Insurance Corporat ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-20-1970
Reported in: (1973)ILLJ443Cal
Salil Kumar Datta, J.1. This is an appeal by Messrs. Birati Weaving Factory and its partners against the judgment and decree of the Employees' Insurance Court, West Bengal decreeing a sum of Rs. 936.15 with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum as employees' contribution. The Employees' State Insurance Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) filed an application under Section 75(2)(a) of, the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) for recovery of an amount assessed on ad hoc basis at Rs. 936.15 as the employees' contribution for the period from 2nd April, 1960 to 27th January, 1962. The allegations were that the Birati Weaving Factory was a factory under the said Act and the appellants as the principal employers were liable to pay to the Corporation employees' contribution for the said period as required under Section 40(1) at rates provided in Section 39 read with schedule 1 of the Act. The Corporation prayed for a decree...
Tag this Judgment!Sundardas Thackersay and Bros. Vs. the New Commercial Mills Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-19-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Cal398
ORDERGhose, J.1. This application has two parts. It is made for revocation of leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent granted to institute the suit being suit No. 3371/69 in this court on the ground that the balance of convenience of trying this suit is overwhelmingly in favour of a court at Ahmedabad, Secondly, this application is for stay of the suit filed in this court in view of a Clause contained in the agreement between the parties which provides that the claim of the plaintiff as made in this suit should be tried by a competent court in Ahmedabad. In other words, according to the applicant the parties bargained that although this Court and an appropriate court at Ahmedabad both have jurisdiction to entertain or try the suit, the claim of the plaintiff which is involved in the present suit should be tried by an appropriate court at Ahmedabad. The applicant has prayed for stay of this suit on the basis of the said term of the bargain between the parties.2. The claim of the pla...
Tag this Judgment!Malchand Surana Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-19-1970
Reported in: [1971]82ITR314(Cal)
K.L. Roy, J. 1. This reference under Section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') raises a short but an interesting question for the decision of the court.The facts as given in the statement of the case are as follows : The assessee, Malchand Surana, was served with a notice under Section 34 of the Act for reassessment of his income for the assessment year 1945-46 in February, 1949. As no return was filed in response to the said notice a best judgment assessment was made under Section 23(4) on the 19th April, 1949, on a total income of Rs. 41,500. The assessee made an application under Section 27 of the Act asking the Income-tax Officer to cancel the assessment and to make a fresh assessment as the aforesaid notice under Section 34 was not served on him and he had no reasonable opportunity to comply therewith. His case was that the registered letter containing the notice was actually delivered to his brother who had no authority to receive such notic...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hassanally and Sons
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-18-1970
Reported in: [1971]81ITR282(Cal)
Sankar Prasad Mitra, J.1. This is a reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Up to the assessment year 1959-60 the respondent had two partners, namely, Golam Hussain Hasanali and Eusufali Hasanali. They were brothers and had equal shares. The firm was carrying on business in hardware and mill stores and was granted registration under Section 26A of the Income-tax Act.2. For the assessment year 1960-61, the assessee applied for a fresh registration. It was stated that a deed of partnership dated the 16thMarch, 1959, had been executed and a new firm had been constituted consisting of seven partners. These seven partners and their respectiveshares are as follows :NameShares 1.Golam Hussain Hasanali0-2-0|||}|||0-8-0 annas2.Hatimbhoy Molla Golam Ali (son of No.1)0-2-03.Abbashbhoy Molla Golam Ali (ditto)0-2-04.H. M. Golam Hussain (ditto)0-2-05.Eusufali Hasanali0-2-0||}||0-8-0 annas6.Fakruddin Eusufali (son of No.5)0-3-07.Abbashbhoy Eusufali (ditto)0-3-03. It was clai...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »