Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Feb-24-1956
Reported in : AIR1956All498; (1956)IILLJ4All
ORDERDesai, J.1. This is an application by the J.K. Hosiery Factory a firm manufacturing hosiery in Kanpur, for a writ of certiorari to quash an order dated 26-8-1955 of the Labour Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow Bench, and for any other writ order or direction that may be considered proper. During the pendency of some appeals between the applicant and its workmen in the Labour Appellate Tribunal the applicant, which was carrying on the business on a continuous loss since 1949 and had incurred a total loss of more than Rupees Ten lacs upto the middle of 1953 decided to close down the factory and applied to the Appellate Tribunal for permission to do so and discharge the workmen.Previously it had been laying-off its workmen, from time to time. Before the Tribunal could consider the question of granting permission the applicant withdrew the application on being advised that it was its fundamental right to close down its business and no permission of the Tribunal was required. After withdrawi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Mar-05-1956
..... life insurance company. as evidence of the indebtedness, leslie salt delivered to each insurance company its "3 1/4% sinking fund promissory note due february 1, 1964" in these amounts. the question presented is whether these instruments are subject to the documentary stamp taxes laid on "all bonds, debentures, or certificates of indebtedness issued by any corporation . . . " under 1800 and 1801 of the internal revenue code of 1939. [ footnote 1 ] the commissioner of internal revenue held the tax applicable ..... , 1919. the 1920 revision of regulations 55 was substantially identical, as were the regulations issued under the revenue act of 1921 (regulations 55, articles 8 and 35). [ footnote 11 ] "sec. 113.50. scope of tax. section 1801 imposes a tax upon the issue by any corporation of bonds, debentures, certificates of indebtedness, and all instruments, however termed, with interest coupons or in registered form ..... 40 stat. 300, 319, 323, 40 stat. 1057, 1133, 1137, 42 stat. 227, 301, 305, and repealed by the revenue act of 1924, 43 stat. 253, 352. [ footnote 8 ] in this same treasury decision, "promissory note" was defined as "an instrument not under seal containing ..... . 74 argued december 7, 1955 decided march 5, 1956 350 u.s. 383 certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit syllabus in 1949, a corporation in need of funds to meet maturing bank loans and for working capital borrowed $3,000,000 from one insurance company and $1,000,000 from another for 15 years, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-14-1956
Reported in : [1956]29ITR910(SC)
The judgment of S. R. Das, C.J., and Venkatarama Aiyar, J., was delivered byDAS, C.J. - In the year 1945 the respondent company (hereinafter called the 'assessee') received a payment of sum of Rs. 26,000 (rupees twenty-six thousand) from Jupiter Pictures Ltd. of Madras (hereinafter referred to as Jupiter Pictures) pursuant to the terms of an agreement between the assessee and the Jupiter Pictures dated the October 31, 1945. In the course of the proceedings for the assessment of the assessees income-tax for the year 1946-47 and the excess profits tax for the chargeable accounting period from April 1, 1945, to March 31, 1946, the following question arose :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 26,000 received by the assessee from Jupiter Pictures Ltd. is a revenue receipt assessable under the Indian Income-tax Act ?'The Income-tax Officer took the view that the sum was in the nature of a revenue receipt and was liable to be brought to account for purpo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Mar-15-1956
Reported in : AIR1956Mad629; (1956)2MLJ372
Govinda Menon, J.1. The defendants are the appellants in this appeal which arises out of a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 13,100-6-0 on foot of a deposit made in Burma payable in Rangoon under Exhibits B-1 and A-1. The Lower Court has held that the suit is maintainable in the Madras State and decreed the same with interest at certain rates. Aggrieved by that decision, the defendants have come up here.2. The main question that has been argued by Mr. Krishna Rao, for the appellants, is that the Indian Courts have no jurisdiction, especially because under Exhibit A-1, the principal sum together with interst at the Rangoon nadappu rate less one-sixteenth was payable at Rangoon and that being the case and the situs of the debt being in a foreign country, municipal Courts here have no jurisdiction to entertain the suit. The origin of ' the debt is a deposit at Paungde in Burma on 17th January, 1928, when India and Burma formed part of the British Empire. But later on, as is well-known, Bu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Apr-27-1956
Reported in : AIR1956Cal470
ORDERP.B. Mukharji, J.1. This is an application by Jupiter General Insurance Company Limited to set aside an award by Sir Rupendra Coomar Mitter dated 12-4-1955 and to declare it null and void.2. The dispute is between the applicant, an Insurance Company, and the Corporation of Calcutta. It arises out of a policy of insurance No. C. T. 890 which the Corporation of Calcutta took cut on 19-4-1952 whereby the Insurance Company agreed to indemnify the Corporation up to a limit of Rs. 1.50,000/- against any loss of money occasioned by robbery, theft, or any other cause whatever whilst in transit.3. What happened was that on 3-12-1952, a bag containing cheques of the value of Rs. 2,36,179*13-6 and cash amounting to Rs. 28,694-7-6 was removed at about 12 noon by an undetected thier from the office table of Bhupendra Krishna Sinha, a general clerk employed in the Treasurer's Department of the Corporation of Calcutta. Payment of the cheques was stopped and the moneys covered by such cheques wer...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : May-28-1956
Offutt Housing Co. v. County of Sarpy - 351 U.S. 253 (1956) U.S. Supreme Court Offutt Housing Co. v. County of Sarpy, 351 U.S. 253 (1956) Offutt Housing Co. v. County of Sarpy No. 404 Argued April 26, 30, 1956 Decided May 28, 1956 351 U.S. 253 CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA Syllabus Petitioner entered into a contract with the Secretary of the Air Force, under which petitioner leased from the Government land on an Air Force base in Nebraska and built thereon housing accommodations to be rented by petitioner to military and civilian personnel of the base under strict governmental control. The lease was for a term of 75 years at nominal rental, and provided that the buildings and improvements erected by petitioner should become part of the real estate and that, upon expiration or termination of the lease, all improvements made upon the leased premises should remain the property of the Government without compensation. The estimated useful life of the buildings and i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-11-1956
United States v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. - 351 U.S. 377 (1956) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 351 U.S. 377 (1956) United States v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. No. 5 Argued October 11, 1955 Decided June 11, 1956 351 U.S. 377 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE Syllabus In a civil action under 4 of the Sherman Act, the Government charged that appellee had monopolized interstate commerce in cellophane in violation of 2 of the Act. During the relevant period, appellee produced almost 75% of the cellophane sold in the United States; but cellophane constituted less than 20% of all flexible packaging materials sold in the United States. The trial court found that the relevant market for determining the extent of appellee's market control was the market for flexible packaging materials, and that competition from other materials in that market prevented appellee from possessing monopoly powers in ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jul-16-1956
Reported in : AIR1957Mad115
1. I have had the advantage of reading the Judgment which my learned brother is about to deliver and in view of the Importance of the question of law raised I wish to add a few words of my own.2. What are the scope and import of the dispositions of life insurance policies; (a) by assignment and (b) by nomination seem to be the chief points for consideration.3. That a policy of life Insurance is a security for money payable at a date uncertain, but calculable is well established for the sum insured is certain, the premium or consideration for its payment is also cetain and the time when the money is payable is also certain where the date is fixed but uncertain on death. As per Porter's Laws of Insurance (8th edn. p. 305) a life insurance policy is "Nihil Certius morte, nihil incertius hora mortis,"4. Such being the case a life insurance policy has to be construed as a contract to pay a certain eum in a certain event depending on the duration of human life. Such a policy always forms par...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jul-16-1956
Reported in : (1956)2MLJ476
Govinda Menon, J.1. I have had the advantage of reading the judgment which my learned brother is about to deliver and in view of the importance of the question, of law raised I wish to add a few words of my own.2. What the scope and import of the dispositions of life insurance policies : - (a) by assignment and (b) by nomination are seem to be the chief points for consideration.3. That a policy of life insurance is a security for money payable at a date uncertain, but calculable is well established for the sum insured is certain, the premium or consideration for its payment is also certain and the time when the money is payable is also certain where the date is fixed but uncertain on death. As per Porter's Law of Insurance (8th edn., page 305) a life insurance policy is nihil certius morte, nihil incertius hora mortis.4. Such being the case a life insurance policy has to be construed as a contract to pay a certain sum in a certain event depending on the duration of human life.. Such a ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Aug-14-1956
Reported in : AIR1957Mad309
1. This is a petition filed under Article 228 of the Constitution for a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order, directing the respondents to forbear from enforcing in any manner the resolution passed by respondents 2 to 9 on 7th April 1956. There was a prayer for a similar writ in regard to the convening of the annual general body meeting of 29th June 1956; but we are leaving that out of consideration, because that date is now long past, and no meeting took place on that date. The petitioners are a firm of Al AR. Arunachalam Chettiar represented by four partners whose names are set out in the petition. The first respondent is the Kaleeswarar Mills Ltd., Colmbatore, and respondents 2 to 9 are its present directors.The first respondent-Mills was incorporated as a limited liability company in 1903 with the object of carrying on the business of spinning and weaving of cotton yarn and cloth. In consideration of the services rendered by the petitioner firm in the promotion o...
Tag this Judgment!