Kolkata Court March 1973 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.
Jute Distributors Vs. Sushil Kumar Gupta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-21-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Cal386,78CWN962
Bhattacharyya, J.1. This Lettors Patent Appeal by the plaintiff is directed against the judgment and decree of Chittatosh Mukherjee, J., dismissing the plaintiff's appeal.2. The short Point for decision in this appeal is whether defendant No. 1 acting in the ordinary course of business as a mercantile agent, transferred some shares to the plaintiff with the consent of its owner (defendant No. 3) and whether the plaintiff acted in Rood faith and without notice of want of authority on the part of the seller.3. Facts necessary for the purpose of determination of this appeal may briefly be stated.4. Defendant No. 3 purchased 500-fully paid up ordinary shares of M/s. Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd., on or about April 9. 1964, through Stock Brokers M/s. Onkar & Sons, of which defendant No. 1 was the proprietor. The said shares were registered in the name of defendant No. 3 on June 9, 1964. After registration, the company (defendant No. 2) returned the share scrips to M/s. Onkar & Sons towards the ...
Commissioners of Basirhat Municipality Vs. Anukul Chandra Das and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-20-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Cal9,77CWN22
Salil Kumar Datta, J. 1. This is an appeal by the defendants the Commissioners of Basirhat Municipality against a judgment of affirmance. The plaintiff instituted a suit on thefollowing allegations. There is a piece of land known as landing ghat near the post office of the town formerly used for coming over to river Ichhamati. This land was being settled temporarily by the municipality to different persons from time to time. The plaintiff took settlement of the land from 1953-54 at an annual rent of Rs. 30/- and on erection of shop room thereon had been carrying on business there. Municipal Commissioners put a notice on March 16, 1956 for settlement of the landing ghat for three years. At the auction held on March 23, 1956 the plaintiff took the land with the highest bid of Rs. 75/-as annual rent and deposited Rs. 45/- on that date. A kabuliat was to be executed within 15 days under the terms of auction. In spite of requests the Commissioners did not supply the plaintiff the particular...
Biswanath Samanta Vs. Income-tax Officer, A-ward and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-20-1973
Reported in: [1973]92ITR331(Cal)
Ghose, J.1. This is an application made by the petitioner for the issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent to withdraw or cancel the notice dated March 19, 1969, issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1960-61. The application also seeks for the issue of a writ in the nature of certiorari, inter alia, for quashing or setting aside the said impugned notice.2. The petitioner is a partnership firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act. The petitioner is also registered under the provisions of the Income-tax Act. The partners of the petitioner are Biswanath Samanta, Tarapada Daw and Prasanta Samanta. For the assessment year 1960-61 the Income-tax Officer, A-Ward, Special Survey Circle II, Calcutta, completed the assessment of the petitioner under Section 23(3)/ 23(5)(a) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The petitioner, it is stated, at the time of the said assessment furnished to the assessing Income-tax Officer all c...
Durgapada Pai Vs. Debidas Mukherjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-19-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Cal14,77CWN734
Salil Kumar Datta, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff in a suit tor partition. The suit land is comprised in plot No. 3004 Khatian No. 356 of mouza Kashigram. There is no dispute that the plaintiff is the owner of -/8/- as share in the suit property purchased from defendants Nos. 2-3 out of their 2/3rd share The defendant No 1 inherited his 1/3rd share in the property and purchased the remaining 1/6th share from the defendants Nos 2 and 3 thereby acquiring 1/2 share of the property. The suit land measured 5 decimals and is recorded as a Bas-toc with one ghar. The plaintiff instituted a suit for partition and in that suit the defendant No 1 filed an application under Section 4 of the Partition Act for pre-emption of the plaintiff's share alleging that the disputed property was the dwelling house of the undivided family of the defendants contemplated in the said section. The plaintiff opposed the said prayer contending that the co-sharers never possessed the disputed property as the...
Mac Culloch Vs. the State and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-19-1973
Reported in: 1974CriLJ182
ORDERN.C. Talukdar, J.1. This Rule is at the instance of the accused-petitioner, Mac Culloch for quashing proceedings under Sections 147, 323, 341, 448, 504, 427 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, being case No. C/293/73, pending against the petitioner and others in the Court of the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta.2. The facts leading on to the Rule are short and simple. A petition was filed by the complainant, Md. Shar-fuddin on the 30th January, 1973 before the learned Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta under Sections 147, 323, 341, 448, 504, 427 and 506, I.P.C. The cause title mentioned that the application is under Section 156(3), Criminal Procedure Code and it contained a prayer to the effect that the police may be directed to take cognizance of the offences committed on treating the complaint as F.I.R. or in the alternative process may be issued against the accused. A list of witnesses was Riven below the said application. The learned Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta...
The Corporation of Calcutta and ors. Vs. Dhirendra Nath Sen and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-1973
Reported in: AIR1973Cal506,78CWN183
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. This is an appeal arising out of an order of P.K. Banerjee, J., dated 21st of September, 1970. On the 5th of December, 1870, by a conveyance the Secretary of State of India in Council conveyed about 200 Bighas of land commonly known as Dhapa to the Justice of Peace for the town of Calcutta for conservancy of the City of Calcutta. In or about 1880 the said Dhapa Dumping Ground wasthereafter leased out to Bhabanath Sen, the predecessor-in-interest of the Sens, the respondent to the present appeal, in consideration of the lessees agreeing to pay the rent partly in cash and partly by doing work of unloading refuse wagons at their own costs and expenses. Since thereafter the Sens and their predecessors-in-interest were holding a substantial portion of the said Dhapa land popularly known as 'Dhapa Square Mile' as lessees under the Corporation of Calcutta. On the 29th of July, 1909, the lease was renewed for a further period of 22 years. Thereafter by a resolution th...
Bimalendu Bhusan Das Vs. Firm Mitra and Ghosh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-1973
Reported in: AIR1973Cal515
Amaresh Roy, J. 1. Appellant Bimalendu Bhusan Ghose is a tenant in a portion of Ground floor of premises No. 65 Keshab Chandra Sen Street, Calcutta. He has been a tenant there for about 25 or 26 years under the previous owner, and occupied entire northern block of the ground floor including the courtyard and shed therein at a monthly rental of Rs. 45/-. The plaintiffs, a firm Mitra and Ghosh represented by the partners, purchased the property in 1965. Old rent of Rs. 45/- per month continued to be paid to the plaintiffs but a portion of the old tenancy namely the old bathroom and the structure in the courtyard, was taken possession of by the landlord and a new bathroom was constructed and was given to the tenant. That was by mutual arrangement arrived at on 20th of September, 1965. Trouble arose when the plaintiffs set up a printing press in the structure in the courtyard and the machine started operating in 1966. Regarding the noise caused by the machine the defendant raised protests....
Union of India (Uoi), Representing South-eastern Rly., Calcutta Vs. La ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Cal207,77CWN983
ORDERMurari Mohan Dutt, J.1. This Rule is against the judgment and the decree of the lower appellate Court upholding those of the trial Court with a slight modification.2. The suit out of which this Rule arises was instituted by the opposite party. _a partnership firm, against the Union of India representing the South Eastern Railway praying for compensation to the extent of Rupees 958.80 on account of short delivery of a consignment of ground-nut-oil. A consignment of 686 tins of ground-nut oil was booked on August 1, 1965 from Ex-Metur Dam to Bankura and the opposite party firm was the consignee for valuable consideration in respect of the said consignment. When the goods reached the destination station. 17 tins were found partially empty and 13 tins entirely empty resulting in a total loss of 282 kg. of ground-nut oil. The opposite party claimed the price of the oil delivered short at the rate of Rs. 3.40 per kg. amounting to Rs. 958.80.3. The petitioner, the Union of India, contest...
Dr. M.N. De and anr. Vs. Dr. B.N. Mukherjee, Principal, Calcutta Natio ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1973
Reported in: AIR1973Cal519
ORDERChittatosh Mookerjee, J. 1. In the year 1964 the petitioner No. 1, who is an eminent medical practitioner of Calcutta, decided to make a gift of a sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) to the Calcutta National Medical Institute, Gorachand Road, Calcutta. On the 6th August, 1964 the Hony. Secretary of the said Institute wrote a letter to the petitioner No. 1 accepting the said gift in the following terms:'In continuation of my letter No. 2/2063/S dated 20-6-64 and subsequent verbal discussion with you, we shall be glad to name a Ward in the Medical Block of our Hospital as Dr. M. N. De Block on condition that you donate a lump sum of Rupees 50,000/- to the institute. We further agree that you and your heirs will be entitled to nominate one student possessing qualification as laid down by the Governing Body for admission to the Pre-medical Course of our College.' The second paragraph of the above letter dated the 6th August, 1964 has come up for interpretation in the pres...
Aloke Chand Mitra Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-09-1973
Reported in: [1973]31STC474(Cal)
P.K. Banerjee, J.1. The short point which is called for decision is whether the dressed chicken is meat within the meaning of item No. 4 of Schedule I read with Section 6 of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941.2. Mr. Chakravorty contended that the chicken is meat. Mr. Chakravorty relied upon the case reported in The Collector of Sales Tax, Bombay State v. Gaurimal Mahajan and Sons [1959] 10 S.T.C.452 in support of his contention. The Bombay High Court held in the said case that 'dressed poultry' is included in the connotation of the expression 'meat' as used in entry No. 4 of the Second Schedule of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1946. The Bombay High Court held at page 455, as follows :The argument of the sales tax department is that meat, which is understood as such in common parlance, would undoubtedly be excluded from the operation of the taxing provisions of the Act but dressed poultry will not be deemed to be so excluded because it is not meat in ordinary parlance. The expression ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »