Kolkata Court September 1970 Judgments
Narayan Choudhury Vs. Radha Gobinda Dutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-29-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Cal53,1971CriLJ208
N.C. Talukdar, J.1. This appeal is at the instance of the complainant-appellant and is against an order dated the 11th June, 1968, passed by Sri J. N. Bhattacharya, Magistrate 1st Class, Burdwan acquitting the accused-respondent under Section 251(11) of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the charge under Section 500. I.P.C. in Case No. C. R. 1344 of 1965.2. The facts leading on to the appeal can be put in a short compass. Both the parties are respectable; the complainant Sri Narayan Chowdhury is the Chairman of the Burdwan Jillah Pari-shad while the respondent is the Editor and Publisher of a fortnightly styled as the 'Bardhamaner Dak'. The parties belonged to and worked together for Congress in the past and then about 15 years back there was a parting of ways. A petition of complaint was filed before the Sub-divisional Magistrate, Burdwan under Section 500, I.P.C. by the complainant, Narayan Chowdhury, against the Editor of the fortnightly, Radha Gobinda Dutt, stating inter alia that t...
Tag this Judgment!Hindusthan General Insurance Society Ltd. Vs. Punam Chand Chhajar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-29-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Cal285
S.K. Chakravarti, J.1. The only point that arises for determination in this appeal is as to whether a contract of insurance is liable to be avoided by the insurer on account of the fact that there has been a misrepresentation with regard to the quality of the goods insured.2. M/s. Sova Chand Fushraj of Jalpaiguri booked a consignment consisting of 38 double gunny bags said to contain Pekoe Dust Tea weighing 68 maunds 35 seers under Invoice No. 4 R. R. No. A 102241 dated the 10th February, 1952 at the Jalpaiguri Railway Station on the North Eastern Railway for carriage to and delivery at Chitpore, a station on the East Indian Railway. The plaintiff claimed to be an endorsee of the Railway Receipt for valuable consideration and admittedly this consignment was insured by him, with the defendant Insurance Society, hereinafter referred as the Society, under policy M. J. 5138 dated the 20th February, 1052 and it covered all risks including theft, pilferage, nondelivery etc. The sum insured f...
Tag this Judgment!Mahua Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-29-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Cal507
ORDERS.C. Ghose, J.1. This is an application for an injunction restraining the respondents from instituting any proceeding, taking any action or passing any order against the petitioner under the Foreigners Act, 1946, until the disposal of the suit.2. The suit is for a declaration that the plaintiff is a citizen of India, permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their servants and agents from treating the plaintiff as a foreigner and costs.3. The facts leading to the present application are that the petitioner's parents came to India in 1910, to permanently settle in India. According to the petitioner the original domicile of the petitioner's parents were Chinese. The petitioner was born in 1928 in India. In 1946 when the petitioner became 18 years of age father's domicile was Indian and thus the petitioner became an Indian citizen with the coming into the operation of the Constitution of India on the 26th January, 1950. The petitioner became an Indian citizen under Article 5(a...
Tag this Judgment!Panchanan Mondal Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-29-1970
Reported in: 1971CriLJ875
ORDERTalukdar, J.1. This Rule is at the instance of the accused petitioner against an order dated the 21st April 1969, passed by Sri A. K. Roy. Sub.Divisional Magistrate, Tamluk in C. R. Case No. 728 of 1968 rejecting the prayer of the accused-petitioner to grant a certified copy of the first information report in the case to him.2. A point of law of some importance arises in the Rule and the background of facts leading on to the same may be put in a short compass. The accused Panchanan Mondal was arrested in connection' with Panskura P. S. Case No'28 of 396m under Sa 302/201, Penal Code and produced before the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tamluk on 22.10-1968. The forwarding report by the police stated that the accused was suspected in the P. I R. by the complainant and his complicity transpired during the investigation He was directed to be in jail custody till the 6th November, 1968. On a prayer for bail made on his behalf on 6 11-1968, the C. 8 I. opposed the same and the pra...
Tag this Judgment!Nrishingha Murari Datta Vs. Ajit Kumar Dutta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-28-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Cal213,76CWN316
ORDER1. This Rule was issued upon an application under Section 5 of Limitation Act praying for condonation of delay that is thought to have occurred in filing a memorandum of appeal in this Court which was filed on 24th of December 1969.2. The appeal is directed against a decree passed by the 3rd Court of Subordinate Judge at Alipore in Title Suit No. 7_5 of 1956. The suit was one for partition. At the stage after the preliminary decree had been passed and the Commissioner for Partition had submitted his report, the objections to the Commissioner's report was disposed of by the learned Subordinate Judge on 24th December 1968 and the Commissioner's report was accepted. It was then ordered by Order No. 138 dated 24-12-68 that the preliminary decree be made final with subsequent costs. Commissioner's report, plan and the Field Book be made part of the final decree.3. Thereafter two applications for amendment of the plaint were made and by Order No. 154 dated 10-5-69 the learned Subordinat...
Tag this Judgment!Union Drug Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-28-1970
Reported in: [1974]93ITR91(Cal)
Arun K. Mukherjea, J.1. This reference arises out of the following facts and circumstances. The assessee is a company manufacturing, among other things, medicines. Before May, 1959, the assessee used also to manufacture serum. The assessee appears to have suffered loss of income from the production of serum for a considerable number of years as a result of which the assessee finally decided to stop the manufacture of serum with effect from May, 1959. As a consequence of this stoppage certain animals which were kept by the assessee for the manufacture of serum became actually useless to it for its business. The assessee, therefore, sold away these animals. By reason of this sale the company suffered a loss amounting to Rs. 9,929. The company claimed deduction of the said sum of Rs. 9,929 under Section 10(2)(viii) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, for the assessment of its income for the assessment year 1960-61. The Income-tax Officer, however, disallowed this deduction. On appeal the ...
Tag this Judgment!Jyotirmoy Bose Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Cal122
ORDERP.K. Banerjee, J. 1. In this application the petitioner who is a member of the Parliament challenges an order passed by the President under Article 356 of the Constitution of India and also the order being G.S.R. 491 as also the order passed by the Governor appointing the Advisers being respondents Nos. 4 to 8 and the rule of business dated 6th April, 1970. The petitioner prayed for a writ of quo-warranto against respondents Nos. 4 to 8. Without issuing a Rule, I directed the petitioner to serve a copy of this application on the respondents Nos. 2 to 8. In pursuance of that order, the respondents Nos. 2 to 8 appeared through Mr. Advocate-General and respondent No. 1 appeared through Mr. S. C. Bose. After hearing the parties in full, I do not find any merit in the contentions and I do not, therefore, propose to issue a Rule.2. The facts which were not disputed are that after the resignation of Mr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee on or about the 16th March, 1970, the President of India, in pur...
Tag this Judgment!Mihir Kumar Sarkar and ors. Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-23-1970
Reported in: AIR1972Cal355
S.K. Chakravarti, J.1. This appeal is at the instance of the petitioners in an application under Article 226 of the Constitution against an order passed by our learned brother A. K. Sen, J. by which he had dismissed the application on the ground that the 'petitioners have no locus standi to maintain this application disputing [he validity or otherwise of the purported acquisition of the aforesaid R. S. Plot No. 212.'2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows : Certain plots including R. S, Plot No. 212 were notified for acquisition for reclamation of the Salt Lake Area and the notification was published on the 14th of February, 1956. The declaration under Section 6 was made on the 22nd of May, 1968. The present appellants challenged the proceedings on the ground that they were entitled to get notice thereof, and that the same was mala fide and was not for any public purpose etc. That was registered as C.R. 7132(w) of 1968. In that proceeding the R.S. Plot No. 212 was left o...
Tag this Judgment!Sm. Amiya De Vs. Dhirendra Nath Mandal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-22-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Cal263
ORDERS.C. Ghose, J.1. This is an application made by the defendant, inter alia, for relief against forfeiture of the tenancy made by the decree passed by consent in the instant case. The defendant was a tenant under the plaintiff in respect of 35-B, Gopi Mohan Dutt Lane, Calcutta, under an indenture of lease dated June 15, 1954. The defendant having committed defaults in performing the covenants which he was to perform under the lease, the said lease was determined and a suit for ejectment was filed in this Court on or about 28th May, 1969. The tenancy of the defendant in respect of the premises was determined by reason of his default in payment of rent for the months of January, February, March and April, 1969. The defendant after being served with the Writ of Summons in this suit duly entered appearance and filed the Written Statement. Discoveries were made by the parties to the suit. The suit appeared in the peremptory list of A. N. Sen, J. on 22nd April, 1970. On or about 22nd Apri...
Tag this Judgment!Shakuntala Devi Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-22-1970
Reported in: [1971]82ITR416(Cal)
T.K. Basu, J.1. In this reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in maintaining the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 33B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, setting aside the assessments and directing the Income-tax Officer to make fresh assessments in accordance with law?'2. The facts relating to this reference may be briefly noted. The relevant assessment years are 1956-57 to 1961-62. The assessee is an individual and the relevant previous years are the financial years 1955-56 to 1960-61.3. The assessee was a new assessee who had not hitherto been assessed to income-tax and suo motu filed returns for the assessment years 1955-56 to 1961-62 before the Income-tax Officer, 'B' Ward, 24-Parganas. All the returns were filed on the same date, i.e., the 18th September,...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »