Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jul-31-1970
Reported in : AIR1970Cal557,[1971]41CompCas234(Cal),1970CriLJ1635
R.N. Dutt, J.1. The petitioner is on his trial before a Special Court at Alipore for an alleged offence under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The instant case was allotted to the Special Court by a notification of the State Government and the Special Court took cognizance on a petition of complaint filed before it by the Public Prosecutor. The petitioner raised an objection before the Special Court that the Special Court had no jurisdiction to try the instant case. But the Judge presiding over the Special Court has found that he has jurisdiction. The petitioner has thereafter obtained this Rule for quashing the proceeding pending before the Special Court against him.3. The allegations are in short as follows:--3-A. The petitioner was the Secretary of Mahasakti Samabaya Samiti, a registered Co-operative Society. While working as such Secretary the petitioner is said to have committed criminal breach of trust in respect of Rs. 14,432.92p. The Special Court will have jurisdiction ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Mar-13-1970
Reported in : AIR1970Cal513,[1971]41CompCas603(Cal)
S.K. Mukherjea, J.1. The question which has to be decided in this appeal is whether a nominee under a life insurance policy can validly assign the claim in respect of the policy after the holder of the policy dies but before the policy matures. It also raises a larger question namely whether a nominee can assign the claim under the policy or surrender the policy at all.2. One Narayan Chandra Ghosh, a person considerably advanced in age, took out a policy of insurance on January 24, 1947, by payment of a single premium of Rupees 15,000/-. Under the policy a sum of Rs. 33,000/- was payable on January 17, 1978 to the assured or his nominees, executors, administrators or other representatives-in-interest as the case might be. It is not without significance that the moneys payable under the policy were payable not on the death of the assured but at a fixed date. Moreover, as only one single premium was payable there was no question of premiums ceasing to be payable on the death of the assur...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Sep-29-1970
Reported in : AIR1971Cal285
S.K. Chakravarti, J.1. The only point that arises for determination in this appeal is as to whether a contract of insurance is liable to be avoided by the insurer on account of the fact that there has been a misrepresentation with regard to the quality of the goods insured.2. M/s. Sova Chand Fushraj of Jalpaiguri booked a consignment consisting of 38 double gunny bags said to contain Pekoe Dust Tea weighing 68 maunds 35 seers under Invoice No. 4 R. R. No. A 102241 dated the 10th February, 1952 at the Jalpaiguri Railway Station on the North Eastern Railway for carriage to and delivery at Chitpore, a station on the East Indian Railway. The plaintiff claimed to be an endorsee of the Railway Receipt for valuable consideration and admittedly this consignment was insured by him, with the defendant Insurance Society, hereinafter referred as the Society, under policy M. J. 5138 dated the 20th February, 1052 and it covered all risks including theft, pilferage, nondelivery etc. The sum insured f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jun-16-1970
Reported in : AIR1970Cal485,1974CriLJ1341,74CWN847
S.K. Mukherjea, J.1. The question which arises for determination in this case is whether the High Court in its revisional jurisdiction is competent to interfere with an order passed by a Judge of the High Court in the exercise or its original criminal jurisdiction. If it is, a further question arises whether in the facts of this case, the order of the learned Judge discharging the accused from his bail bond should be set aside.2. The accused Haridas Mundhra was the Chairman of the Board of Directors of Richardson and Cruddas Ltd., and the managing director of its Managing Agents S. B. Industrial (Private) Ltd. He was being tried in the High Court Sessions on three counts of offences, under Section 418, Section 465 read with Section 471, and Section 477A of the Indian Penal Code. It was alleged that as a director of Richardson and Cruddas Ltd. and as the managing director of Section B. Industrial Development Company (Private) Ltd., he cheated Richardson and Cruddas Ltd., in the sum of R...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jul-17-1970
Reported in : [1972]83ITR470(Cal)
P.B. Mukharji, C.J.1. The Tribunal has referred in this income-tax reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following question for decision by this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on the interpretation of Sections 22 and 23 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal was right in holding that in computing the income from property the bona fide annual value of the property at 3, Gun Foundry Road, Calcutta, has not to be taken and in disallowing the vacancy remission and other deductions in respect of the aforesaid property 'Even though the words of the question are not as clear as they could and should be, it is plain what the question asks. The question is whetherthere is an annual value of premises No. 3, Gun Foundry Road, Calcutta, and whether it is to be taken into account under Section 22 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal has held that such a property is outside the scope of Section 22 of the Act. The second part of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Sep-14-1970
Reported in : AIR1971Cal182,75CWN517
..... -holders in suit no. 178 of 1960 in the court of second civil judge, kanpur. on november 30, 1964, a similar order was made by the master of this court in execution case no. 13 of 1964 on the application of life insurance corporation of india the decree-holder in special appeal no. 299 of 1961 of the high court, allahabad. in all these three matters orders were made by the courts passing the said decrees, attaching the decree obtained ..... made.43. it seems to us that the trial court in directing payment to the receiver and delivery of the shares and transfer deeds by him to the purchaser, and in default directing rescission of the contract had relied on the statement of the law in art. 1173. p. 547 of fry. in our view, however, the law in this country regarding rescission of a contract with regard to which a decree for specific performance has been passed, is codified in section 35(c) of the old act and section 28 of the specific relief act. 1963. to ..... 's conduct in opposing delivery of the shares on various grounds and his subsequent willingness and readiness to take delivery of the shares upon payment of the purchase price. in support of his contentions on approbation and reprobation mr. mukherjee relied on the decisions : [1956]1scr451 , : air1968ap336 and : air1963cal132 . in the view we have taken of the submissions made on behalf of the appellant regarding the prayers in the petition, it is not necessary for me to deal with these decisions in this judgment.60. turning now to .....
Tag this Judgment!