Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Sep-19-1975
Reported in : AIR1976Cal88
Salil Kumar Datta, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment and order of S.C. Ghosh, J. discharging the Rule issued on the petitioner's application under Article 226 of the Constitution. The relevant facts according to the petitioner are as follows :2. The petitioner at the material time was working as the Assistant Branch Manager (Development) of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) attached to the City Branch No. 2. By an order dated March 14, 1969 the petitioner was placed under suspension by the Zonal Manager, Eastern Zone of the Corporation, Respondent No. 2 as, it was stated, a disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner was contemplated. On April 30, 1969 the petitioner was served with a charge-sheet containing four specific charges, all relating to defalcation of money. We are concerned really here with the charge No. 1 as the petitioner had been acquitted of all other charges. The charge No. 1 is to the following effect :'T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Dec-23-1975
Reported in : AIR1976Cal224,80CWN278
M.M. Dutt, J.1. This appeal is at the instance of the defendant and it arises out of a suit for mortgage.2. The plaintiff is the Life Insurance Corporation of India and its case is that the defendant is the sole and absolute owner of the properties described in Schedules B, B (1) and B (2) of the plaint. On June 14. 1955, the defendant borrowed a sum of Rs. 65,000/- from the Rajasthan Insurance Company Limited by deposit of title deeds and, on that date, executed a promissory note for the said sum in favour of the said Insurance Company and a memorandum embodying the terms of the transaction specifically mentioning therein the deposit of title deeds and the loan of the said amount already taken by him. On December, 29, 1955, the defendant paid a sum of Rs. 975/- in part payment of the interest and since then has paid nothing in spite of repeated demands. The assets and liabilities appertaining to the controlled business of the said Insurance Company having been transferred to and veste...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Mar-20-1975
Reported in : 1976CriLJ56
Bimal Chandra Basak, J.1. This application for a writ of Habeas Corpus is directed against an order of detention passed by the Commissioner of Police, Calcutta the respondent No. 2 herein on the 2nd of December, 1974 in exercise of the powers conferred by subsection (1) (a) (ii) read with Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) The said order was passed with a view to preventing the detenu. Shyamal Nandi, from acting in any manner prejudicial to the security of the State. The incidents relied up- on the grounds of detention served on the detenu are as follows : (1) You being a leader of the Revolutionary Communist Unity Centre (Marxist-Leninist), now Communist Unity Centre (Marxist-Leninist), in West Bengal along with others including Biswanath Mukherji of Khardah attended a secret meeting of the said party held in a house at Seal's Garden Lane, Calcutta on 16-9-1974 wherein you along with other participan...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jun-13-1975
Reported in : AIR1975Cal467
ORDERSalil Kumar Hazra, J. 1. Two petitions filed by Batokristo Roy Company (Private) Limited for setting aside two awards dated May 9, 1969 and July 19, 1969 by the Tribunal of Arbitration of Bengal Chamber of Commerce and Industry were assigned to me by the learned Chief Justice. The first petition was filed on July 30. 1970 for setting aside the award dated July 19, 1969. I shall deal with this petition first. The facts are shortly as follows : Batokristo Roy Company (Private) Ltd. (I shall shortly call Roy Co.) carries on business as importers, exporters and commission agents in jute and jute goods H. Polesy and Co. (Importers) Private Ltd., a Company incorporated in Australia (I shall shortly call Australian Co.) carries on business as importers and dealers in jute and jute goods. 2. On or about March 21, 1968 Roy Co. and Australian Co. entered into a contract whereby Australian Co agreed to buy from Roy Co. and Roy Co. agreed to sell to Australian Co. 200 bales of light wool pack...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Mar-21-1975
Reported in : [1978]48CompCas211(Cal),81CWN137
..... object of the company was insurance and all others were ancillary to it and the court held that the principal business having gone, the very substratum of the company also disappeared and it was held, that that alone would justify the winding up of a company under the just and equitable rule. that was a case where the application was made under sections 397, 398, 399 and 402 of the companies act, 1956, for various reliefs ..... the business which the company is carrying on with their approval which was obtained by holding the meeting under section 149(2a) of the companies act, 1956.46. in the case of registrar of companies, punjab v. suraj bachat yojna private ltd [1973] 43 comp cas 343 (punj), the registrar of companies filed a petition for winding up of messrs. suraj ..... chief justice of the supreme court).30. mr. mukherjee, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, registrar of companies, west bengal, cited the case of a. ramachandran v. narasaraopet electric corporation ltd. [1972] 42 comp cas 182 (ap), where the entire undertaking of the company was acquired by the government of madras and the compensation to the extent of rs. 1,06,977 was ..... shareholders.'32. mr. mukherjee has also relied on the case of in re hindusthan co-operative insurance society ltd. [1961] 31 comp cas 193 ; 65 cwn 68 (cal) in which by the life insurance (emergency provisions) ordinance of 1956 the management of the controlled business of the company vested in the central government. that was the only business of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jul-18-1975
Reported in : [1978]111ITR825(Cal)
Sen, J. 1. This reference arises out of the assessment of M/s. Braith-waite & Co. (India) Ltd., a public limited company, within the meaning of the Companies Act, 1956, for the assessment year 1965-66. The facts found as appearing from the statement of the case and the annexures thereto are as follows :On the 2nd May, 1964, the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, received the assent of the President and came into force while the corresponding earlier Act, namely, the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963, ceased to be in operation. On the 15th May, 1964, the recommendations of the directors for the ensuing annual general meeting of the assessee was finalised. The statement of the chairman of the assessee to the members was recorded as follows: 'The profit for the year after providing Rs. 14,19,333 for depreciation and transferring Rs. 7,03,186 to development rebate reserve, amounted to Rs. 1,24,47,705 which shows an increase of approximately Rs. 18 lakhs over the previous year. This result is ...
Tag this Judgment!