Kolkata Court January 1971 Judgments

Life Pharmaceuticals (Private) Ltd. Vs. Bengal Medical Hall

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1971Cal345

ORDERRamendra Mohan Datta, J.1. This is an application under Section 30 of the Code of Civil Procedure for stay of this suit filed on or about July 28, 1970.2. The facts shortly are that on or about July 19, 1966 the plaintiff Life Pharmaceuticals Private Ltd. (hereinafter called the plaintiff company) appointed the defendant (hereinafter called the defendant firm) the Chief Regional Distributor of the products of the plaintiff company for the East Zone. On or about December 1969 the defendant firm came to know that one Messrs. Hindusthan Medical Syndicate was appointed as stockist by the plaintiff company in respect of its products. The defendant firm protested against such appointment with the result that on or about January 5, 1970 the plaintiff company terminated the agreement and canqelled the Chief Regional Distributorship granted to the defendant firm.3. On or about January 6, 1970, the defendant firm filed the Title Suit No. 5 of 1970 in the Alipore Court (hereinafter called th...

Bengal Luxmi Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer, M-ward and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: [1973]87ITR618(Cal)

Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. In this application the petitioner challenges the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of the assessment year 1960-61. For the aforesaid assessment year the petitioner had been given development rebate in respect of certain machinery in the original assessment. It is the case of the petitioner that these machinery were brought into use in the year prior to the previous year relevant for the present assessment year. In that year before the Income-tax Officer, according to the assessee, the assessee had produced all the relevant documents showing that these machinery had been brought into use by the petitioner and the petitioner was entitled to claim development rebate in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The petitioner has, therefore, challenged the issue of the notice on the ground that there were no materials and no reasons for the Income-tax Officer to form the belief that due to any omission or failure on the part...

United India Minerals and ors. Vs. the Assistant Collector of Customs ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 1971CriLJ1370

ORDERSabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. The petitioner in this application challenges the show cause notice dated the 8th March, 1967 issued by the respondent No. 1 and the proceedings thereunder. The petitioner which is a limited company carries on business of mining and exporting mica. In July and August 1964, the petitioner exported several cases of 'No. 6 Block Spotted Loose Mica Splittings' of the 1st and 2nd quality to Italy by s. s. 'Malacca'. The said goods were exported under four separate shipping bills. On the 4th February, 1964, a Trade Notice was issued by the Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, Calcutta, whereby exports of some varieties of mica were prohibited and some varieties were allowed to be exported subject to a minimum f. o. b. price per kg. as specified in the said Trade Notice. The export of mica of varieties other than those specified in the said Trade Notice could be exported without any restriction as to the minimum f. o. b. prices, 'No. 6 Black Spotted Lo...

Bengal Corporation Private Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner for the Port of C ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1971Cal357

T.K. Basu, J.1. This is an action by the plaintiff Bengal Corporation Private Ltd. for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 11,399.81 P. as the balance of the price of goods sold and delivered.2. According to the plaintiff it is the sole agent in India of Teikoku Sangyo Co. Ltd.. Osaka, Japan who are manufacturers of wire ropes. On the 10th November 1962 the defendant, Commissioners for the Port of Calcutta, issued invitation for tenders in respect of the supply of wire ropes of various specifications mentioned therein. Pursuant to the invitation for tender, the plaintiff offered to supply to the defendant wire ropes of the required specifications manufactured by its Japanese principals. The salient terms of the offer of the plaintiff were, inter alia, the following:(a) The plaintiff would supply with each consignment a manufacturer's Test Certificate and also a Lloyd's Certificate, (b) The goods would conform to B.S.S. 302/621 of 1957, (c) The defendant at its own costs would be entitled to h...

Joy Kissen Arora Vs. Raghunath Prosad Gupta

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1971Cal482

A.N. Sen, J.1. This application under Order 21, Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure raises an interesting question of law of some importance. Shortly put, the question is, whether the applicant decree-holder who has obtained against the defendant judgment-debtor Ragunath Prosad Gupta a decree for vacant possession of the open plot of land which had been let out to the said Ragunath Prosad Gupta, is entitled to evict the respondents who claim to he tenants under the said Ragunath Prosad Gupta of portions of the structures built by the said judgment-debtor Raghunath Prosad Gupta on the said open plot of land.2. The open plot of land in question belongs to the Board of Trustees for the improvement of Calcutta and was held by Gopekrishna Arora, Mulch and Arora, Radhakrishna Arora and Joykrishna Arora as lessees with an option to purchase the same. In a suit for partition between the Aroras, a receiver was appointed over their properties, including the laid in question. The land in quest...

Lalit Mohan Ghosh Vs. Atal Mondal and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1972Cal81

S.K. Chakravarit, J.1. The only Point that arises for determination in this appeal by the defendants is as to whether the plaintiff could claim a right to be declared as Korfa-Raiyats under the defendants-appellants even after the expiry of the period of lease of their prede-cessor-in-interest, without any direct evidence to show that the landlords had Riven consent to such holding over.2. Admittedly, the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiffs was one Annada and he was in possession of the case-land on the basis of a Kabuliyat for a term of 7 years expiring with the last of the term does not necessarily create a tenancy of any kind (Gopal Chandra v. Khater Karikar, 33 Cal WN 1207 = (AIR 1930 Cal 262)) and though the assent of the lessor cannot be inferred merely from his delay in taking steps to evict the lessee (Ratan v. Farshi, (1907) 11 Cal WN 826), but in a case where the tenant retained possession for 11 years after the expiration of the lease, the Court inferred that there was...

Smt. Sayambari Dassi Vs. Dwijapada Naskar

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1971Cal435,75CWN560

S.K. Chakravarti, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the present appellant for the purpose of ejecting the defendant from a homestead plot. The case of the plaintiff was that the defendant being the son-in-law of her sister used to look after her properties and in that capacity used to reside on the homestead in suit but he has been recorded as a tenant under her in the recent khatian, which is wrong, and she, therefore, sued to have her title declared and for confirmation of her possession. The plaint was subsequently amended to enable her to recover possession thereof.The defendant contested the suit alleging that he was a tenant indicated in the homestead by the plaintiff's husband who was the original owner of the land, that he used to pay the rents to him and after his death to the plaintiff herself, but that no dakhilas were given. Both the courts below have found that the defendant was not a tenant at all in respect of this homestead. Both the courts have found tha...

Abul HossaIn and ors. Vs. Masadul Haq and anr.

Court: Kolkata

ORDERS.N. Bagchi, J.1. This Revision raises two points one of which has not been decided either by this High Court or by any other High Courts. The first question, as contended by Mr. Roy the learned counsel for the petitioners is whether on the evidence, the learned Magistrate was justified in holding all the accused petitioners guilty under Section 456/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing each of them to pay a fine of Rupees 200/- each in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months each. The learned Magistrate directed that out of the fines, if paid. Rupees 500/-would go to the complainant P. W. 1 as compensation. The learned Magistrate further directed that the complainant should be restored to possession of the premises in question being No. 41, Bepin Behari Ganguli Street and directed the accused persons to vacate the premises and also directed the Officer-in-Charge. Bowbazar P. S. to enforce the order forthwith under Section 522 of the Code of Criminal Procedu...

Karam Chand Thapar and Bros. (Coal Sales) Vs. Inder Mohan Kapoor

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1972Cal82

ORDERRamendra Mohan Datta, J.1. In my opinion, if the materials which are now being placed before the Court had been available to the Court at the time of granting such leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent then the court, in its discretion, would not have granted the leave considering the balance of convenience of the parties. In exercising its discretion in granting leave under Clause 12 it is always relevant for the Court to consider the question of balance of convenience but it is not possible for the Court to consider the same when the Court grants this leave ex parte at the time of the institution of the suit. Therefore the proper time to consider the balance of convenience is the time when the application for revocation of the leave under Clause 12 is heard.2. To succeed in an application for revocation of leave on the ground of balance of convenience, a strong case has to be made out. In other words, a mere balance of convenience would not be enough but it must be such th...

Rajlakshmi Dassi Bechulal Das Vs. Krishna Chaitanya Das Mohanta

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1972Cal210

S.A. Masud, J. 1. In this matter the Will of one Sm. Rajlakshmi Dassi of No 7 Fariapukur Street, now known as Sibdas Bhaduri Street. Calcutta has been challenged by the defendant, hereinafter described as 'Mohanta.' According to the plaintiff. Bechulal Das, the sole executor, Rajlakshmi executed her will on November 28, 1929 and thereafter on December 18, 1929 she died. Under the said will the testatrix has provided for a life interest in the said premises No. 7 Fariapukur Street in favour of her younger sister Sm. Saraswati Dassi. It is also provided that on the death of Sm. Saraswati Dassi the brother of the testatrix Shri Gopal Chandra Das and his daughter Sm. Jagatomohini Dassi shall enjoy the said property in equal shares during the period of lifetime of each of them. The Will further states that on the death of the said Gopal Chandra Das and Sm. Jagatmohini Dassi 5 persons, i.e. Surendra Nath Das, Ganendra Nath Das, Ananda Nath Das. Dwijendra Nath Ghosh and the plaintiff Bechulal...