Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Apr-12-1989
Reported in : 1991ACJ813,AIR1991Cal55,[1991]72CompCas195(Cal)
ORDER1. The facts leading to this writ petition inter alia are that on or about 28th March, 1978 Smt. Radha Rani Singh since deceased, the wife of the writ petitioner took out two policies of Life Insurance bearing Nos. 33456592 and 33456593 each for Rs. 50,000/- from the defendant No. 1 and the petitioner was appointed the nominee under S. 39 of the Insurance Act in both the policies. The said policies were issued by the respondents after full and proper medical examination of the insured lady. In or about the last week of the month of Jan., 1984. The said Smt. Radha Rani Singh suddenly fell ill and on 28th Jan., 1984 she was admitted to the Calcutta Medical research Institute at 7/2, Diamond Harbour Road, Calcutta for treatment and on 29th Jan., 1984 she expired at the said Hospital. The said insured during her life-time had duly paid all insurance premiums which were payable up to the time of her death and by letter dt. 3rd Feb., 1984 the petitioner lodged his claim to the sums insu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Aug-21-1989
Reported in : AIR1990Cal204
1. The plaintiff and the defendant are two sisters, Ram Kumar Changil, father of the parties, died intestate on 12th day of January, 1978. The two daughters, who are the plaintiff and the defendant in this suit are the only heiresses and/or legal representatives under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The suit as initially instituted was for partition of several other assets also and for claiming an equal half share in all the properties and assets left by the said deceased.2. It is not disputed that the plaintiff and the defendant were and are entitled to one equal half share each in the properties left by the said deceased excepting two items of property as mentioned hereunder. The partiesare also agreeable that a decree be passed for partition of all such assets mentioned in the said Schedule 'A' and 'B', save and except the said two items as mentioned hereunder:--1. Seven shares in Embassy Co-operative Housing Society Limited, 4, Shakespeare Sarani, Calcutta-700017. 2. All that the f...
Tag this Judgment!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,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jul-19-1989
Reported in : AIR1990Cal216,(1990)1CALLT11(HC),1989(2)CHN27
ORDERM.R. Mallick, J.1. This is an appeal against the Original Judgment and decree passed by Sri K.D. Banerjee, Judge, 7th Bench of the City Civil Court at Calcutta dated 9th April, 1985 decreeing the Plaintiff/ Respondent's suit for eviction of the defendant, appellant from the premises No. P-l on the first floor with garage space in the basement and a servant's quarter in between the first and second floor in the building known as 'Apsara' at premises No. 67, Park Street, under Police Station Park Street, Calcutta.2. The facts may be briefly stated as follows:The plaintiff was and still is the owner of the above flat having purchased the same from M/s. Progressive Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. The defendant had been a monthly tenant under the plaintiff in respect of the aforesaid flat with garage space and servant's quarter more fully described in the schedule of the plaint at a monthly rental of Rs. 1060/- payable according to English Calendar month within 5th day of each and ev...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Mar-16-1989
Reported in : AIR1991Cal181
ORDER1. The writ petitioner has challenged the Memo dated 28th June, 1988 issued by the Assistant Assessor-Collector, Ward No. 93, Tollygung Tax Department, of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation intimat-ing to the petitioner refusing to mutate his name in respect of Premises No. 1/345, Gariahat Road (345, Jodhpur Park), Calcutta-68. The case of the writ petitioner briefly is that the father of the petitioner, Sudeb Sundar Chakraborty since deceased, was a member of Bengal Secretariat Cooperative Land Mortgage Bank and Housing Society Ltd., a body corporate constituted under the Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 1940 (now W. B. Co-operative Societies Act, 1983), The Society owned and possessed a big plot of land at Premises No. 1, Gariahat Road, which was sub-divided and distributed amongst its members according to the value of the shares and the father of the petitioner was allotted the Plot No. 345 by the Society whereon he constructed a two-stories building. The father of the petiti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Feb-17-1989
Reported in : (1989)1CALLT214(HC),1989(1)CHN185,93CWN462,[1990(60)FLR458],(1990)IILLJ522Cal
Monoj Kumar Mukherjee. J.1. This appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent is directed against the order dated December 6, 1988 passed by a learned Judge of this Court issuing a Rule Nisi and an interim injunction on a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by Guest Keen Williams Junior Management Staff Association ('Association' for short) and its five members. Facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of the appeal are as under.2. Guest Keen Williams Ltd. ('Company' for short) is a Company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1913, with the liability of its members limited by shares, having its registered office at 3-A Shakespeare Sarani, Calcutta and carries on business at, amongst other places, Andul Road, Howrah where it has one of its factories. The Company is engaged in the business of, amongst others, manufacture of iron and steel materials. The Company is managed and controlled by a Board of Directors, which include two nominee Directors, one...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Dec-19-1989
Reported in : [1993]202ITR64(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J. 1. The Tribunal has referred the following question of law under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 10 lakhs or any part thereof is taxable in the hands of the assessee or arisen in India ?' 2. The assessment year involved is 1966-67, for which the relevant accounting period is the calendar year 1965. The assessee is a non-resident company which entered into three separate agreements dated March 12, 1964, for erecting a plant for the production of graphite and rendering services in connection therewith, Graphite India Ltd. (hereinafter described as 'the Indian company ') was to pay to Messrs. Great Lakes Carbon Corporation Rs. 14,00,000 under the agreement. The facts found by the Tribunal as stated in the statement of case are as under : The assessee is a non-resident company. Its accounting year for the assessment year 1966-67 was the calendar year 1965. Proceedings underSection ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Apr-20-1989
Reported in : 1991ACJ349
Ajit Kumar Nayak, J.1. The only short question that has been raised in these two appeals heard analogously, viz., Nos. 406 and 407 of 1980, arising out of the decision of the Claims Tribunal Judge, dated 18th September, 1979, is the extent of liability of the appellant insurance company. It has been urged that in view of the specific provisions contained in Section 95(2)(b) of the Motor Vehicles Act, the upper limit of liability of an insurer cannot exceed Rs. 5,000/- in anyone accident, involving a vehicle carrying passengers.2. It is an admitted position that following an accident on 19.6.1977, involving passenger bus No. WWB 2226, in the district of Midna-pore, two claim petitions were filed before the Claims Tribunal Judge, Midnapore, one in respect of deceased passenger, Hemanta Kumar Samanta, travelling by the said bus and the other in respect of a helper employee, Binoy Krishna Ghanta, of the offending bus meeting the same fate. Both the claim petitions were tried and heard anal...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jun-15-1989
Reported in : AIR1990Cal157
ORDER1. The West Bengal Cement Ltd. and Mr. B. K. Sahani, the Chairman of the West Bengal Cement Ltd. and also a share-holder for self and on behalf of the share-holders of the West Bengal Cement Ltd. have filed this writ petition for a writ of mandamus challenging the notices dated 9-10-1987 and 13-11-87 issued by the respondent No. 3 as ultra vires, bad in law and void and for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to forbear from proceeding on the basis of or in pursuance of the said notice or any identical notice of such nature and to withdraw and/or to cancel them and also of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to forbear from giving any effect and/ or further effect and / or proceeding on the basis or in pursuance of the said two notices and for consequential reliefs.2. The facts which are material for the purpose of this writ petition may be briefly stated as follows :--The petitioner No. 1, West Bengal Cement Ltd. was under the management of the re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Aug-08-1989
Reported in : [1991]187ITR657(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J. 1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, made at the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred for the opinion of this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the liability to pay the arrear rent and cess of Rs. 4,13,666 arose in the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1976-77 and, therefore, it was an admissible deduction in the aforesaid assessment year ?'2. The facts which, are admitted and/or found by the Tribunal are as under :The assessee, a public limited company, carries on business in the manufacture and sale of tea. It owns a tea garden which is situated in the State of West Bengal. The assessee follows the mercantile system of accounting. The previous year of the assessee relevant to the assessment year 1976-77, which is now in reference before this court, commenced on March 1, 1975, and ended on February 28, 1976.3. In ...
Tag this Judgment!