Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Aug-14-1970
Reported in : AIR1971Cal150
ORDERS.C. Deb, J.1.This suit was filed by the plaintiff with leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent on 12th September, 1963, claiming Rs. 26,721/- as outstanding balance of freight payable by the defendant with interest thereon in respect of a cargo of coal carried by the plaintiff in Voyage No. 31 by the vessel 'JAG SEVAK'.2. In the plaint it is, inter alia, alleged that the Chief Commercial Superintendent of Eastern Railway Administration on behalf of the defendant shipped 7730 metric tons of steam coal on board the plaintiff's said vessel 'JAG SEVAK' for being carried by the plaintiff from the port of Calcutta and for being delivered at the Port of Cochin to the Southern Railway Administration of the defendant. The plaintiff duly carried the said cargo by that vessel under a Bill of Lading dated November 10, 1960 and duly delivered those goods to the defendant's said Railway Administration at the Port of destination on 25th November, 1960.Under the Bill of Lading the total frei...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jul-28-1970
Reported in : AIR1972Cal160,75CWN236
Sabyasachi Mukharjee, J. 1. This is an appeal against the order and judgment of P.K. Banerji, J. dated 25th November. 1969 rejecting the petitioners' application under Article 226 of the Constitution without issuing a rule nisi. The petitioners are the three practising attorneys of this High Court, and in the petition there was a prayer for leave under Order 1. Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure. During the hearing of this appeal, learned Advocate for the petitioners, abandoned the prayer for leave under Order 1, Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The application has therefore been treated as an application by the three named petitioners in their individual capacity and not in their representative capacity. In the application the petitioners challenge the establishment of City Civil Court by the Calcutta City Civil Court Act, 1953 (West Bengal Act No. XXI of 1953) and the amendment of the said Act by the City Civil Court (Amendment) Act. 1969 being West Bengal Act XXXV of 1969 a...
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 : 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 : Dec-15-1970
Reported in : AIR1971Cal275
ORDERA.N. Sen, J.1. This is an application by one of the judgment-debtors for setting aside the sale of premises No. 38, Kali Krishna Tagore Street, Calcutta held on 25th of March 1970 by the Sheriff of this Court in execution of a decree.2. The said premises No. 38, Kali Krishna Tagore Street appears to be heavily encumbered. It appears that there are 4 mortgages on the said property and the said mortgages have all been mentioned in the Sale proclamation. One of the mortgagees. United Bank of India Ltd has filed a suit in this Court for enforcement of the mortgage and in the said suit a Receiver has been appointed over the said premises No. 38, Kali Krishna Tagore Street. Calcutta and the Receiver has been and is still realising the rents, issues and profits of the said premises The Receiver was there when the plaintiff decree-holder took steps for execution of this decree and the plaintiff decree-holder after obtaining necessary leave of this Court to proceed in execution against the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jun-10-1970
Reported in : [1970]26STC489(Cal)
P.B. Mukharji, C.J.1. These two Sales Tax References Nos. 395 of 1965 and 521 of 1967 relate to the same facts and the same parties. For the sake of convenience and also on the submission of the learned counsel in these matters, we are disposing of the questions raised by one judgment.The two questions raised in these references for decision are as follows :-(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, in exercise of his powers Under Section 20(3) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, the Additional Commissioner was competent to reassess the gross turnover of the petitioner by taking into consideration additional material which had not been made available to the Assessing officer ?(2) Whether on the facts admitted or found by the Tribunals below, the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes was vested with the authority or jurisdiction, under Sub-section (3) of Section 20 of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, read with Rule 80 A of the Rules framed th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jun-03-1970
Reported in : AIR1970Cal505,75CWN256
Salil Kumar Datta, J. 1. These two appeals arise out of two suits relating the affairs and administration of the Hoogly Imambarah. As, to some extent, common questions of fact and law are involved in the two appeals, on the prayer of the parties, the appeals have been heard analogously.2. The Hoogly Imambarah is a public and religious establishment founded by Hazi Mohammad Mohsin of hallowed memory in 1806 who by a wakfnama dedicated vast properties to God Almighty, for the benefit in particular of Shia Muslims as also for others purposes of public and charitable nature. Formerly the Imambarah was managed by the Government through the Board of Revenue and the local agents. On the coming into force in 1863 of the Religious Endowments Act (Act XX of 1863), hereinafter referred to as the said Act or Act XX of 1863, the management of the Imambarah vested in a Committee of Management appointed by the Government, under provisions of the said Act.3. The relevant provisions of the Religious En...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Feb-24-1970
Reported in : AIR1970Cal535,1970CriLJ1631,75CWN48
R.N. Dutt, J.1. An enquiry under Chapter XVIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure is pending against the opposite parties before a Presidency Magistrate under various sections of the Official Secrets Act, On an application on behalf of the prosecution under Section 14 of the Official Secrets Act the learned Magistrate made an order on April 28, 1969, excluding the public during the trial.2. On November 19, 1969, opposite party No. 12 filed an application before the Magistrate for 'copies of deposition of the witnesses' and opposite party No. 16 filed an application for 'copies and for permission to inspect the records and take necessary notes'. The learned Magistrate considered these applications and passed an order on November 22, 1969, allowing them under Section 548 of the Code 'to take copies of depositions and other documents on payment of proper fees'. The State has thereafter obtained this Rule against this order of the learned Magistrate.3. Mr. Roy appearing on behalf of the Sta...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Feb-20-1970
Reported in : AIR1970Cal462,[1970]78ITR214(Cal)
P.B. Mukharjl, Act. C.J. 1. This reference under the Wealth Tax Act raises the following question for answer :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee had no right on the relevant valuation dates to receive any compensation for the acquisition of his estate from the Government of West Bengal'.2. Although the question is framed in that way the real issue by refraining the question is :'Whether in the facts and circumstances of this case, the right to compensation under the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953 constitutes an asset within the meaning of the Wealth Tax Act and specially in view of the fact where such compensation under the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act has neither been determined nor paid.'The facts of this case lie within a small compass. The statement of case refers to the assessments during 1957-58, 1958-59 and 1950-60. There are six re- ference applications upon which the statement of cas...
Tag this Judgment!