Kolkata Court April 1989 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.
United Bank of India Vs. Rashyan Udyog and Others, Etc.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Cal146,[1992]73CompCas482(Cal),93CWN1130
ORDERA.M. Bhattacharjee, J. 1. Theonly question involved in these two appeals at the instance of the decree-holder Bank is whether the trial Court was wrong in not granting the pendente lite and also post-decree interest, while decreeing the two suits giving rise to these two appeals, warranting our intervention.2. The trial Judge, while decreeing these two suits, said nothing about the pendente lite as well as post-decree interest and must therefore be held to have refused such interest and, as has been made clear in the Memorandum of Appeal in both the appeals, the appeals are directed 'against the portion of the judgment and Decree refusing pendente lite interest and interest on the decretal amount till realisation.'3. Exaction of interest on loan, more often than not, operates harshly on the debtors. Our ancient Hindu Law condemned such practice. Vasista said (Vasista-Sanhita, Chapter II, Verses 36042) that 'if destruction of foetus and exaction of interest were weighed in balance,...
Cycle Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. Biswanath Dhandhania and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Cal405
ORDERMrs. Padma Khastgir, J.1. In asuit filed by the respondents Biswanath Dhandhania & Ors. against Cycle Corpb-ration of India Ltd. the appellant herein, an application for final judgment under Chapter 13A of the Rules of this Court was moved before Mr. Justice Ajit Kumar Sengupta whereupon the learned Judge passed a decree directing the appellant to pay to the plaintiffs a sum of Rs. 12,13,482/- together with interest at the rate of 9% per annum and cost assessed at Rs. 1,700/- of such application. Mr. Gour Roychowdhury, the learned lawyer was appointed as Receiver to hold the decretal sum. The learned Judge proceeded on the basis that there was an unequivocal admission of liability by the appellant in respect of a sum of Rs. 12,13,482.95 and the respondents/plaintiffs were not in any way concerned with the liabilities of their sister concerns.2. Biswanath Dhandhania and Radhe-shyam Dhandhania carried on business in partnership in the name and style of M/s. General Oil Co. Biswanath...
Gobardhan Karmakar Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1989
Reported in: (1989)2CALLT76(HC),93CWN1120
A.M. Bhattacharjee, J.1. This revisional application by the petitioner is against his conviction and sentence in a prosecution Under Section 13(1) of the Rice-Milling Industry (Regulation) Act, 1958. The Act is obviously a Parliamentary legislation enacted under Entry No. 52 of the Union List which relates to 'Industries, the control of which by the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be expedient in the public interest' and Section 2 of the Act contains the requisite declaration to the effect that 'it is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that the Union should take under its control the rice-milling industry'. It is manifest that as a result of such a declaration as in Section 2, Rice-Milling Industry has become exclusively a subject for Union legislation.2. By the West Bengal Act XXIV of 1974, being the Rice-Milling Industry (Regulation) (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1974, the Union Legislation of 1958 has been amended whereby Section 9 of the Union Legi...
Oriental Decorators and anr. Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1989
Reported in: (1989)1CALLT374(HC)
ORDERMonoranjan Mallick, J.1. The Writ-petitioner which is a decorating firm has moved this Writ Court praying for a writ of Mandamus and Prohibition directing the respondent-Sales Tax Authorities not to demand or impose or collect any sales tax from the writ petitioner in respect of its business transactions as decorators for erection of pandals. It is complained that the Inspector of Sales Tax Department had been visiting the business premises of the writ petitioners and had been demanding such Sales Tax. But, the pandals erected by the writ petitioners at the instance of the customers not being 'Goods,' such erection of pandals does not in any way come within the definition of the Sales given in Section 2(g) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act 1941. It is submitted that a pandal, erected with bamboo posts or other such posts, is fixed at particular place and such pandal does not come within the definition of 'Goods' as given in Section 2(d) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1...
Malati Dasi Vs. Japa Hari Pal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1989
Reported in: (1989)1CALLT391(HC)
Shamsuddin Ahmed, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and Order of acquittal passed by the Learned Sessions Judge, Birbhum in Criminal Appeal No. 20 of 1977.2. Malati Dasi, the appellant herein filed a complaint alleging that she was married with accused Japa according to Hindu rites on 4th Baisakh, 1377 B.S. The marriage was subsisting on the date the complaint was filed. On 18th Agrahyan, 1380 B.S. Japa married Parul Bala Dasi and registered their marriage according to the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act. Other accused persons abetted the commission of the Office committed by Japa, accordingly, she filed the complaint alleging offences under Section 494 I.P.C.3. The Learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rampurhat framed charge under Section 494 I.P.C. against Japa and under Section 494/109 I.P.C. against the other accused persons.4. The Learned Magistrate considering the evidence on record convicted the accused under Section 494 I.P.C. and sentencing to 2 yea...
Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs. Bangladesh Shipping Corporation and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1989
Reported in: 1990(27)ECC248,1993LC85(Calcutta)
Padma Khastgir, J.1. In a suit filed by the Steel Authority of India Ltd. against Bangladesh Shipping Corporation and others, an application was taken out by Bangladesh Shipping Corporation for an order that the plaint filed in Suit No. 703 of 1981 be rejected and/or taken off the file and the suit against the defendants be dismissed. In the said application, Bangladesh Shipping Corporation the defendant No. 1 stated that the vessel 'M.V. Bangladesh Maitri' belonged to Bangladesh Shipping Corporation which was under the Ministry of Communication of the Government of People's Republic of Bangladesh. The said government being a government of a foreign state and the petitioner being of such foreign State the petitioner was entitled to foreign immunity, as such, this Court had no jurisdiction to hear and/or proceed with the suit, without the necessary permission of the Central Government as contemplated under Section 86 of the Civil Procedure Code.2. The plaintiff filed the instant suit on...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Poddar Properties Development Corporati ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-11-1989
Reported in: [1989]180ITR111(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. This reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, relates to the assessment year 1973-74. This reference arises out of the order of the Tribunal in a proceeding under Section 185 of the Act, where the Income-tax Officer refused registration to the assessee-firm. In the order under Section 185, the Income-tax Officer has held as follows :'The topic 'partnership' has been dealt with in Section 2(23) of the Income-tax Act where general principles have been laid down. Firstly, the question of validity of partnership is most important. 'Partnership' is the relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them acting for all. An association of persons would not constitute a partnership unless they carry on a business. An agreement to share profits is very important and the emphasis has been laid on the word 'business' and 'profits' and not on incomings. This is a case of 'co-ownership of leasehold pr...
Consumer Unity and Trust Society Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-11-1989
Reported in: (1989)2CALLT179(HC)
P.K. Mukherjee, J.1. The present writ petition, was moved before me on September 5, 1988 challenging, inter alia, and praying for a writ in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the respondent-authorities, to act in accordance with the provisions of Essential Commodities Act 1955, Food Products Order 1955 and the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act 1954 and to confiscate the article under the name 'Frooti' and 'Appy' under the aforesaid Acts of 1955 and the Act of 1954.2. This Court, upon hearing Mr. Pradip Singh Mehta, who appeared in person, had issued the Rule in terms of prayers (a), (b), (c) and (d) of the writ petition on September 5, 1988 and directed the writ petitioner to serve copies of the writ petition to respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6 and further ordered that the prayer for an appropriate interim order would be considered on September 12, 1988 only after hearing the respondents, in particular the respondent No. 12, i.e., Parle Beverages Private Ltd. (Agro Division), hereinafter r...
Sm. Latika Rani Basu and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-11-1989
Reported in: (1989)2CALLT333(HC)
L.M. Ghosh, J.1. The plaintiffs filed Tide Suit No. 37 of 1972 in the 8th Court of the Subordinate Judge, Alipore for certain reliefs. The defendants 1 and 2 contested the claim of the plaintiffs. On hearing the parties and after examining the evidence on record, the learned Subordinate Judge dismissed the suit.2. The aggrieved plaintiffs have preferred this appeal. It is not disputed that the defendant No. 3 became a lessee under the Khasmal Department in respect of the 'A' schedule property. On the basis of a contract, the plain tiffs got a decree against the defendant No. 3 in respect of the 'B' Schedule property, forming part of the 'A' Schedule property, and also had a deed executed in their favour on 8-10-62. The plaintiffs claimed that in execution, they got possession of the properties and then exercised acts of possession by putting up sign-board and fencing up the land. The plaintiffs stated that they were next taking steps for mutation of their names and at that juncture cam...
Subal Chandra Mondal and anr. Vs. Atul Krishna Ghosh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-11-1989
Reported in: (1989)2CALLT427(HC)
J.N. Hore, J.1. Srimati Saralabala Ghosh, the original plaintiff instituted the Title Suit No. 207 of 1968 in the Court of the learned Munsif, Ghatal for declaration of her title to the suit-land, further declaration that the principal defendants were not bargadars in respect of the same and for permanent injunction restraining them from interferring with her possession. Subsequently, the plaintiff amended the plaint by adding a prayer for recovery of possession, if it was found that she was out of possession. The plaintiff's case was that she purchased the suit-land and was in Khas possession thereof with the help of her labourers. In the Revisional Records of rights, the land was recorded in her name and she paid rent to the State of West Bengal. It was alleged that the principal defendants in collusion with her enemy camp had made an application before the J.h.K.O.-cum-Bhag-chasi Officer as well as an application before the settlement camp claiming themselves as bargadars and for re...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »