Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1906)ILR33Cal219
Arthur Wilson, J.1. The first of these appeals arises out of a suit institute in the Court of the Assistant Political Agent of Sorath Prant in Kathiawar (the term Prant meaning an administrative district). The grounds of the plaintiff's claim, so far as it has now to be noticed, were that in February 1893 he had advanced money to the late Darbar Shri Vala Naja Mamaiya, a shareholder in the Chief ship or Talukdari of Jetpur Chital in Kalhiawar, for the purpose of paying off debts due by the latter, who was a talukdar of the 6th class, and that the plaintiff had acquired possession; that Vala Naja died in May 1901; and that the plaintiff's rights as mortgagee had been interfered with or threatened by the nominal defendant as Manager for the substantial defendants, the successors of the deceased Chief. The plaintiff prayed for a declaration of his rights and an injunction. In effect therefore the suit was one to enforce a mortgage made by a deceased Chief against his successors. The Assis...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1933Cal841
C.C. Ghose, Ag. C.J.1. The facts involved in this appeal, shortly stated, are as follows: One Pasupathi Nath Mukerjee, a wealthy Hindu inhabitant of Calcutta, died on 9th May 1919 possessed of considerable movable and immovable properties and leaving a will executed by him on the said 9th May 1919. The Administrator-General of Bengal was appointed, executor under the will. He applied for Probate of the said will to this Court on its Original Side and a caveat was entered by the widow of the testator Srimutty Parijat Debi. The application for Probate was set down to be heard as a contentious cause and it was numbered as suit No. 13 of 1920. A period of nearly eight years was taken to obtain evidence on commission of various witnesses on both sides. The suit came on for hearing before Costello, J., some time in 1928 and after the hearing had gone on for 11 days, the parties beneficially interested in the testator's estate came to a settlement whereby the caveat was discharged and probate...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1934Cal803,152Ind.Cas.601
Costello, J.1. This matter comes before us by way of a case stated under Section. 57 (1) Stamp Act (2 of 1899). It is concerned with the adjudication of stamp duty in respect of an indenture dated 5th March 1931 made between the Municipal Board of Lucknow on one side and the United Provinces Electric Supply Company Ltd. on the other. It appears that the Municipal Board of Lucknow was the owner of a certain piece of land which had been acquired by the Government of the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh for the Board under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act (10 of 1870) and a notification of the Government of the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh No. 2790/11/ 644A/2 dated 17th November 1892. For the purposes of carrying out a scheme of reorganisation of its waterworks the Board had obtained a loan from the Government of the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh of the sum of rupees 18,50,000 under the provisions of the Local Authorities Loans Act (9 of 1914). This loan was repayable ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : [1940]8ITR41(Cal)
Sir Wilfrid Greene, M.R. - This appeal from a decision of Lawrence, J., arises out of a claim by G. Scammell & Nephew, Ltd., to deduct for the purposes of ascertaining their taxable profits for the year 1933-34 three sums which they allege were expenses wholly and exclusively laid out or expended for the purposes of their trade. The sum in question are firstly, a sum of Pound 7,500 paid by the Company to one of their directors, Mr. Hood Barrs; secondly, a sum of Pounds 62 10s. 0d., being a contribution paid by them to a Mr. Toms towards his costs of certain litigation and thirdly a sum of Pound 53 10sh. 0d. representing costs incurred by them in connection with a compromise agreement.The circumstances giving rise to that claim for deduction are of a rather complicated nature; they are set out in the case but I must give a short summary of them in order to make this judgment intelligible. The Company (to whom I will refer as Scammells) carry on business as motor engineers and at the rel...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : [1941]9ITR122(Cal)
Appeal from a decision of Maonaghten, J.Briton Steel Forry Co., the appellant company, was incorporated in 1899 and till 1934 its main business was the production of stee, bars, which it supplied to six subsidiary companies and to certion other consumers for conversion into blackplate and tinplate. The company itself convorted steel plates into blackplate at one of its own works. The business of the subsidiary companies was the manufacture of blackplate and tinplate. In 1931 the company formed a subsidiary agency company. From then till April 7, 1934, the course of business conducted by the agency company was that it found its own purchasers of black plate and tinplate; having found a purchaser, the agency at its own discretion selected the subsidiary company best suited to carry out the particular order; all contracts for goods were made by the agency as principal and the agency was entirely responsible for finding outlets for the productions of the subsidiary companies; goods manufac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1956Cal378,60CWN555
ORDERSinha, J.1. There are four petitioners in this application. One of them is a sitting member of the West Bengal Legislative Assembly. The other three describe themselves as 'Citizens of West Bengal', by which they undoubtedly mean Citizen of the Indian Union residing in the State of West Bengal. The Union of India and the State of West Bengal have been made party respondents (No. 4 and No. 2). The other respondents are, Dr. Bidhan Chandra Roy, the Chief Minister of West Bengal (No. 3) and the Speaker of the West Bengal Legislative Assembly (No. 1).The prayers in the petition are all-embracing. They seek for the issue of a medley of high prerogative writs, including the writs of mandamus, certiorari and quo-warranto. They seek to restrain the Chief Minister from functioning or drawing his salary, to injunct the Speaker from presiding over the legislature, and generally to paralyse the administration of the State interalia by stopping recourse to the consolidated fund.At the hearing,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1957Cal534,61CWN630
ORDERSinha, J. 1. The petitioner in this case challenges the validity of the City Civil Court Act, being West Bengal Act XXI of 1953, which was passed by the West Bengal Legislature and has received the assent of the President, such assent being published in the Calcutta Gazette, Extraordinary, dated the 1st September 1953. It is stated to be an Act to establish an additional Civil Court for the City of Calcutta. It is to be called the City Civil Court Act, 1953, and was to come into force on such date as the State Government might by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint. For the purposes of this application the following provisions of the Act are important:---''3. (1). The State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, establish a Civil Court to be called the City Civil Court. (2). The City Civil Court shall be deemed to be a Court subordinate to and subject to the superintendence o the High Court within the meaning of the Letters Patent for the High Court and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1958Cal271,62CWN345,(1958)IILLJ206Cal
ORDERP.B. Mukharji, J. 1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution by three workmen. It is a novel application. Its main purpose is to secure a mandamus to compel the Government to make a reference of an industrial dispute to an industrial tribunal. 2. The prayers in the petition seek for-the issue of a writ of mandamus calling upon the Government to recall, rescind and withdraw the order made in Memo. No. 416 I.R. dated the 8th February, 1957. That order is contained in a letter. The letter concludes by saying'Under the circumstances Government do not like to intervene in the matter any further'.3. The applicants now seek for a Constitutional writ of mandamus to compel the Government to intervene. In this letter, which is described as an order, the Government states that an enquiry was made into the industrial dispute between M/s Alkali Chemical Corporation of India Ltd. and their workmen. It says further that it transpires that'Sri Dandasi was transferred from the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1958Cal415
P. Chakravartti, C.J.1. A great many points were canvassed in this case in the Court below, but of them only one was canvassed in the appeal. The respondent, against whom an arbitrator had made an award on a claim submitted by the Union of India and also on a counter-claim submitted by himself, challenged it before Sarkar J., on several grounds, all of which, except one, failed. The one ground which succeeded was that the arbitrator who had made the award was not competent to act as arbitrator under the provisions of the arbitration agreement. The Union of India sought to resist that ground by contending that the respondent was estopped from taking it, but the learned Judge overruled the contention and declared the award to be void. Dissatisfied with that decision, the Union of India has preferred the present appeal.2. The facts of the case are somewhat extraordinary. On 25-6-1943, the respondent entered into a contract with the then Government of India, as represented by the Superinte...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1959Cal672,62CWN889
ORDERH.K. Bose, J. 1. This is an application for confirmation of a reduction of capital. The petitioner is a public limited company which was incorporated in June 1945 under the Indian Companies Act, 1913. Its registered office is at 12, India Exchange Place, Calcutta. It carries on business of manufacturers, importers and exporters of radios, radiograms, gramophones, refrigerators, cables, electric switches, switch gears and other electrical goods and equipments. The authorised capital of the company is Rs. 50,00,000/- divided into 3,75,000 ordinary shares of Rs. 10/- each, 10,000 five per tent, cumulative participating preference shares of Rs. 100/- each and 50,000 deferred shares of Rs. 5/-each. The total paid up capital of the company is Rs. 29,20,300/- made up as follows: (i)1,89,985 Ordinary shares of Rs. 10/- each...Rs. 18,99,850/-(ii)8452 preference shares of Rs. 100/- each...Rs. 8,45,200/-(iii)35,050 deferred shares of Rs. 5/- each...Rs. 1,75,250/- Total...Rs. 29,20,300/-2. Th...
Tag this Judgment!