Kolkata Court July 1985 Judgments

Executive Director of Usha Sewing Machine Works Ltd. and anr. Vs. Sm. ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1986Cal224,89CWN1121

M.M. Dutt, J. 1. This application under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed at the instance of the defendants, the Executive Director of Usha Sewing Machine Works Ltd., and the Jay Engineering Works Ltd., is directed against Order No. 66 dated Nov. 12, 1984 of the 3rd Court of the Assistant District Judge, Alipore passed in the Suit No. 52 of 1981. By the said order, the learned Assistant District Judge allowed the application for substitution of the heirs of the deceased plaintiff No. 2 Birendra Chandra Roy. 2. The said suit was instituted by the said Birendra Chandra Roy, since deceased, and the plaintiff No. 1 Sha Sha Bindu Roy, who were employees of Jay Engineering WorksLtd., inter alia, praying for a declaration that the notices of their superannuation before their attaining the age of 60 years were illegal, inoperative and void; for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from in any way interfering with plaintiffs' services under the defendant company; for...

Pradyot Kr. Das Mondal Vs. the State

Court: Kolkata

ORDERS.P. Das Ghosh, J.1. On 16-4-1985, on the basis of a secret information, the police intercepted a lorry, bearing No. WGW 1710, loaded with 147 bags of paddy on a road at Amritpal village within Raipur Police Station. The petitioner has claimed the seized 147 bags of paddy on alleging that he is the authorised agent of Bharati Rice Mills situated at Jhanti Pahari within Chatna P. S. in the district of Bankura. He has filed this revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Criminal P.C. for quashing the confiscation case No. 3 of 1985 before the learned Collector, Bankura, regarding the seizure of the paddy and for release of the paddy to him on furnishing of bond of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Collector, Bankura, who was pleased to pass orders on 23-4-85 and 7-6-85 for sale of the paddy.2. The case of the petitioner is that he hired the truck, bearing No. WGW 1710 from Anil Baran Misra, the owner of the truck ...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shib Banerji Properties and Constructio ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: [1986]160ITR567(Cal)

D.K. Sen, J.1. Shib Banerji Properties & Construction (P.)Ltd., Calcutta, the assessee, was assessed to income-tax for the year 1961-62, the relevant accounting year ending on June 30, 1960. The assessee being aggrieved preferred an appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner with partial success and the total income of the assessee as computed was reduced partly. A further appeal was preferred by the assessee to the Tribunal.2. While the appeal before the Tribunal was pending, the Income-tax Officer passed an order under Section 23A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ('the Act'), on May 19, 1965, by which a further demand of additional super-tax was raised on the assessee on the ground that the assessee had failed to distribute the statutory percentage of dividends.3. On an appeal by the assessee, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner vacated the said order passed under Section 23A. The Revenue went up on appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commis...

Amritlal Chum Vs. Devi Ranjan Jha and anr.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: [1987]61CompCas211(Cal)

N.G. Chaudhuri, J. 1. On behalf of Messrs. Jardine Hendersons Ltd., Amrit Lal Chum, one officer of the said company filed on June 28, 1983, a petition of complaint in the court of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, under Sections 406, IPC, and Sections 630 of the Companies Act. The sum and substance of the complaint was that Debi Ranjan Jha, the accused, held various offices under the company during a long career but his service under the company came finally to an end on August 15, 1982. It was alleged that prior to that date, as an officer of the company, he wasgiven possession of a furnished fiat in premises No. 27, Ballygunj Park, Calcutta, of which he was obliged to deliver up possession to the company on termination of his employment. It was alleged that having wrongfully retained possession of the flat after ceasing to be an officer of the company, Mr. Jha, the accused, committed an offence under Sections 630 of the Companies Act and having dishonestly and wilfully ret...

Musammat Ashgari Bibi Vs. Shamal Kumar Basu Mullick and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1986Cal227

Sudhir Ranjan Roy, J. 1. This appeal by the plaintiff who has had a mixed fortune so far, viz., successful termination of the suit before me learned trial court and then dismissal of the suit on appeal by the centering defendants, raises a very short but interesting question. 2. The question involved is whether in a suit against a person who dies before the institution of the suit, his legal heirs and representatives can be subsequently brought on record on discovery of the fact of his death. 3. The plaintiffs suit which is for the setting aside of the ex parte decree passed against her in Title Suit No. 221 of 1957 and for recovery of possession and other reliefs, is based on the following facts: Abdur Rahaman, the plaintiff's father was a thika tenant under the defendants Nos. 1 and 2 in respect of the properties in suit. He died on Nov. 11, 1954 at Dacca leaving the plaintiff and the pro forma defendants Nos. 3 to 5 as his legal heirs. About long three years after his death, the def...

Sachidanand Mishra Vs. Gopalka Auto Finance and anr.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1986Cal294,89CWN1182

M.M. Dutt, J. 1. This Rule raises a short but interesting point Before, however, we indicate the point, it is necessary to state the facts of the case which lie in a narrow compass.2. The petitioner has instituted a suit being Suit No. 2380 of 1974 in the Presidency Small Cause Court, Calcutta against the opposite party No. 1, Gopalka Auto Finance, for the realisation of the sura of Rs. 2,135/- alleged to have been paid by the petitioner to the opposite party No. 1 in excess of the amount due under the hire purchase agreement entered into by the parties in connection with financing a vehicle. The opposite party No. 1 entered appearance in the said suit and filed an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, hereafter referred to as 'the Act', praying for the stay of the said suit alleging, inter alia, that the hire purchase agreement contained an arbitration clause, whereby the parties had agreed to refer their disputes to arbitration. The learned Judge, 4th Bench, Pres...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Babcock and Willcox of India Ltd.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: [1987]165ITR105(Cal)

Ray, J.1. This rule issued on an application of the Revenue under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, calls upon M/s. Babcock & Willcox of India Ltd., the assessee, to show cause why this court should not direct the Tribunal to refer the following question, stated to be a question of law arising out of the order of the Tribunal, for the opinion of this court :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the finding of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that the sum of Rs. 1,99,781 paid by the assessee-company to its employees as customary bonus was an allowable deduction 'The Revenue contends that in view of the Bonus (Amendment) Ordinance promulgated on September 25, 1975, the Tribunal was not justified in applying the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Hukumchand Jute Mills Ltd. v. Second Industrial Tribunal, : (1979)ILLJ461SC , and allow the assessee's deduction for the bonus paid.2. It has been found a...

Bijoy Singh Vs. the State

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 1986CriLJ2016

G.C. Chatterjee, J1. Convicted of an offence under Section 302 1.P.C. and sentenced to life imprisonment by the Judge, 13th Court of the City Sessions at Calcutta in Sessions Trial No. 1 of Jan., 1978, Bijoy Singh, the convicted appellant has come up in appeal before us.,2. The prosecution case was briefly as follows.3. On the night of 2-1-76 at about 9-30 p.m. Joy Kisen Rathi and Kamal Daga (P. W. 5) were preparing to play Badminton on the roof of Premises No. 24, Broja Dulal Street, Calcutta being accompanied by some other local boys. While the boys were trying to affix the net, the convict-appellant Bijoy Singh appeared on the scene abruptly with a knife as also a goopti. When Joy Kisen and Kamal Daga were about to start the game Bijoy Singh dismantled the net and broke down the bulb. Then followed a wordy altercation amongst them. Hearing the row one Suresh Singh and his wife Rajkumari Singh came out from their room situate on the self-same roof where the occurrence took place. Sur...

British Airways Vs. Art Works Export Ltd. and anr.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1986Cal120,89CWN1117

M.M. Dutt, J. 1. This application under Section 115 of the Civil P. C. filed at the instance of the defendant No. 1, British Airways, a Public Limited Company, is directed against Order No. 19 dt. April 25, 1985 of the learned Judge, 4th Bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta dismissing the application of the petitioner under Order 7, Rule 11 of the Civil P. C.2. The suit out of which this application arises has been filed by the plaintiff opposite party No, 1, Art Works Export Limited, on March 13, 1984 in the City Civil Court, Calcutta against the 'defendant petitioner and the pro forma defendant opposite party No. 2, the Bank of India, inter alia, for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 23,235/- on account of damages, compensation and interest for wrongful loss caused by the defendant petitioner as carrier to the plaintiff opposite party No. 1. The case of the plaintiff opposite party No. 1 is that on Dec. 10, 1981, a consignment containing 2,400 pcs. 'Mulberry Raw Silk 100% pure' hand printed ...

The Commonwealth Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sm. Nilima Sarkar and anr.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1986Cal254,[1987]62CompCas5(Cal),89CWN1083

M.M. Dutt, J. 1. This appeal is at theinstance of the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and directed against the award dated January15, 1972 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal.2. The respondent Sm. Nilima Sarkar filed three applications under Section 110A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, hereinafter referred to as the Act, praying for an award of compensation for herself, her husband and her son. Her case was that her husband, late Sukumar Sarkar, was at the relevant time an Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Singbhum Circle, Jamshedpur--under the Government of Bihar. He came to Calcutta along with his wife, the respondent and his children by road in his private Ambassador car during Christmas holidays. After spending the holidays, he was going back to Jamshedpur by road in the same car. Shorn of other details, it may be stated that when his car reached Samudrapur, a place within 10 miles off Kharagpur, along the Bombay Road, it came face to face with a Truck (WGB 1760) from th...