Kolkata Court May 1974 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.
The Pench Valley Coal Co. Ltd. Vs. the Indian Cable Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-17-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Cal284
ORDERSabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. This is an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. The application relates to a suit filed under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In the suit the plaintiff has claimed a decree for Rupees 1.07.604.64 P. against the applicant. The claim is bused on certain hundies drawn and accepted by the applicant in respect of certain goods delivered against the challans by the plaintiff. That the hundies were drawn and accepted in discharge of delivery of the goods is apparent from the hundies - negotiable instruments - themselves which are annexed to the plaint. The suit was filed on the 5th February, 1974, and this application was made under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, or, the 12th March, 1974. It is the case of the applicant that the goods which were delivered by the plaintiff-respondent were defective and damaged and there was also failure to deliver the goods in time as a consequence whereof the applicant had suffered damag...
Burdwan Zilla Motor Mazdoor Mandali Co-operative Society Ltd. and ors. ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-17-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Cal280
ORDERSalil Kumar Datta, J. 1. This is an application under Article 226(1) of the Constitution praying inter alia for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to forbear from giving effect to notices dated June 27, 1969' and August 22, 1969 inviting applications for grant (of) stage carriage permits and also to resolution adoptedby the Regional Transport Authority, Burdwan on September 30, 1969 in furtherance thereof granting permits. There was a prayer also for a writ in the nature of certiorari for quash ing the same. It is to be mentioned that though the prayers were expressed generally against all the routes referred to in the notices this rule is confined to routes Burdwan to Nasigram and Burdwan to Matedanga and the injunction, which was granted at the time the rule was issued is in force in respect of the said routes only. 2. The petitioners' case is that the petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 ply a bus under temporary permits since 1967 on the route Burdwan to Matedanga....
Mugneeram Bangur and Co. Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-17-1974
Reported in: AIR1974Cal369,78CWN725
Sen Gupta, J. 1. These three appeals have been heard together as the same questions of law and facts are involved in all of them. They arise out of the judgment and decree passed by Shri S.N. Bagchi, Special Land Acquisition Judge, Alipore in L. A. Case Nos. 104, 107 and 109 of 1954 (V). 2. These appeals arise out of the following facts: By Notification under Section 4 of Land Acquisition Act 1 of 1894 the Collector of 24 Parganas decided to acquire the lands in mouza Nilgunj and Suryapore covering an area of 273 bighas 5 cottahas and 10 chataks. The lands involved in these cases were acquired by the Government for the establishment of Central Jute Agricultural Research Station. The said notification was published in the official gazette on the 18th December, 1950 and possession of the acquired lands was taken by the Collector on the 29th January, 1951.3. The lands acquired are in a compact block situated in contiguous mouzas. 4. Let us give, in brief, the history how these three appea...
Sm. Swarna Lata Devi Vs. Krishna Iron Foundry and Metal Works (P) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-17-1974
Reported in: AIR1974Cal393,78CWN1039
A.K. Sinha, J. 1. This appeal is preferred by defendant-appellant against an appellate judgment and decree affirming the decree of the trial Court passed in an instituted suit of the plaintiff-respondent.2. We need not recite the facts of this case over again because they are sufficiently stated in the judgment of the appellate court below. Brief outline of the case, however, is that the appellant obtained a declaration and a decree for partition of her 1/3rd share in the disputed properties in a suit brought by her sometime in 1947. The respondent company which took lease of the disputed property from the rest of her co-sharers by different documents executed some-time between 1948 and 1951 during pendency of the partition suit brought subsequently the present suit only against the appellant for setting aside the partition decree and for other reliefs mainly on the ground of fraud and non-joinder of parties. The suit was contested by the appellant and apart from the general denial of ...
Ambika Roy Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-15-1974
Reported in: 1974CriLJ1002
N.C. Talukdar, J.1. The point involved in this Rule is one of law, raised in the backdrop of the new Code of Criminal Procedure. To be more precise, the point relates to the interpretation of Section 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.2. The backdrop of facts necessary for the consideration of the point at issue is a short one. On 18-4-74 at about 10.45 P.M. three persons boarded a taxi, bearing No. WBT 7316, on the Diamond Harbour Road near about the Calcutta Hospital and while the taxi was proceeding towards the Esplanade, passing by the side of the Race Course, one of those three persons all of a sudden directed the claimant-petitioner to stop the taxi. As soon as the taxi was stopped, the three occupants threatened the claimant-petitioner at the point of a dagger and snatched away about Rs. 80/- from him. Thereafter they pushed him out of the taxi which was driven away by them. The claimant-petitioner proceeded to the Hastings Police Station and reported the incident where...
Maheswari and Co. Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. the Corporation of Calcutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Cal165
ORDERSabyasachi Mukherji, J.1. This is an application under Section 20 read with Section 41 of Arbitration Act, 1940. The petitioner which is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 is the owner of a business called Calcutta Spun Pipes & Industries. The petitioner in this application asks for an order of injunction restraining the defendant Corporation of Calcutta from opening or accepting any tender or entering into arty contract with any third party pursuant to a public press notice inviting tenders issued on the 24th January, 1974. The petitioner further asks for an injunction restraining the Corporation of Calcutta from inviting any tender from the public with regard to the supply of any portion of the said 170 pieces of the pipes and collars or from entering into any fresh contract with any third party and for certain other incidental reliefs.2. In order to appreciate the controversy it would be necessary to refer briefly to the facts in this case. The plaintiff being...
Jasodalal Ghosal Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-1974
Reported in: [1975]35STC383(Cal)
Amiya Kumar Mookerji, J.1. The petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act and carrying on its business at 20, Maharshi Debendra Road, Calcutta-7. The petitioner is a dealer in iron and steel and registered under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). For the period of four quarters ending 31st December, 1967, the petitioner was assessed by the Commercial Tax Officer, respondent No. 1, on the 30th September, 1971, under Section 11(1) of the said Act. In computing the taxable turnover the Commercial Tax Officer rejected the claim made by the petitioner under Section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the said Act on the basis of the declaration form supplied by the purchasers, the registered dealers. The petitioner claimed exemption of a total amount of Rs. 25,89,286.18, but the Commercial Tax Officer disallowed Rs. 1,72,905.62 with respect to sales to M/s. Laxmi Iron & Steel Co., M/s. Bansal Iron & Steel Engineering, and M/s. Krishna Commercial...
Jalpaiguri Cinema Co. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Promotha Nath Mukherjee and or ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-13-1974
Reported in: [1978]48CompCas131(Cal)
Ghose, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated November 29, 1973, directing, inter alia, the respondents Pramotha Nath Mukherjee and Monoranjan Mukherjee to be added as parties to the Company Petition No. 398 of 1972 and granting leave to the said respondents to continue the said company petition and all proceedings thereunder, and further directing the original petitioner, Dilip Kumar Ganguli of the said Company Petition No. 398 of 1972, to be transposed to the category of respondents and all consequential amendments to be carried out in the cause title of the said company petition.2. The said company petition was filed on October 3, 1972, by the original petitioner, Dilip Kumar Ganguli, who was at all material times and still now is a shareholder of the Jalpaiguri Cinema Company Ltd., an existing company within the meaning of the Companies Act, 1956, under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956.3. The company was incorporated under the Indian Compan...
In Re: United Collieries Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-10-1974
Reported in: [1975]45CompCas226(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. This is an application under Section 17 of the Companies Act, 1956, for sanction of the alteration of the memorandum of association. The company carried on mainly the business of colliery as the name itself suggests. The colliery business has been taken over by the State as a result of nationalisation. The company, therefore, proposes to venture into new fields. The fields now proposed to be taken by the company are many and are entirely new. The question is whether such alteration should be sanctioned by the court. It has duly received the approval of the shareholders. Notice has been given to the creditors and none is opposing this. The balance-sheets for the last two years indicate that the financial position of the company is not unsound in the sense that the assets are more than the liabilities and for the last two years the company has been making profits. Only the Registrar of Companies is opposing this application. In my opinion, the alteration should...
Atlantis (East Limited) Vs. Additional Member, Board of Revenue
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-10-1974
Reported in: [1975]36STC210(Cal)
A.N. Sen, J. 1. In this reference under Section 21(1) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, the following question has been referred to this court:Whether, on a true and proper construction of item No. 2 of Schedule I of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, as it stood before its amendment by West Bengal Act 14 of 1963, the word 'flour' occurring in the said item included 'barley powder' and as such barley powder was exempt from sales tax or whether barley powder was included in item No. 1 of the said schedule and taxable.2. The facts which give rise to the present reference have been fully set out in the statement of the case. The facts material for the purpose of this reference may be briefly stated. M/s. Atlantis (East Limited) was a registered dealer under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, having its Registration Certificate No. B. H/327B. In respect of the assessment for the 4th quarter ending on 31st October, 1959, the assessee raised the contention that the s...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »