Privy Council Cases
Colonial & appellate judgments
Browse Privy Council & House of Lords decisions
Search appeals from Indian High Courts decided by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and related appellate benches - foundational authority for constitutional and commercial law.
Colonial & appellate
Latest Privy Council judgments
Commr. of Income-tax Vs. Globe theatres Ltd.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1952Cal145,[1950]18ITR403(Cal)
Harries, C.J.1. This is a Reference made by the Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench, under Section 66, Income-tax Act, stating a case for the opinion of this Court upon the following question:'Whether, on the facts & circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 10,000/- paid by the assessee to Madras Publishing House, or any part thereof was an allowable deduction in computing the assessee's income under Section 10 Income-tax Act.'The assessees were Messrs. Globe Theatres Ltd., a public joint stock company, which carry on business as exhibitors of cinema pictures. For the purpose of the business they own certain cinemas & take leases of others & at present they are running seven cinemas in various cities in India.2. It appears that the assessees in the year 1937 advanced a sum of Rs. 10,000/- to a company in Madras known as the Madras Publishing House Ltd. It seems that this latter company were proposing to build a cinema in Madras & this sum was advanced upon an undertaking given by the Mad...
Tag this Judgment!Bholanath Chatterjee and anr. Vs. Chandra Shekhar Bhattacherjee
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1950Cal53
ORDERG.N. Das, J.1. This rule was obtained by the de-fend ant against an order of the Munsiff of Dubrajpur, District Birbhum, dated 28th September 1948. By the said order the learned Munsiff overruled certain objections taken by the defendant to the filing of the award made on a reference through the intervention of the Court and also directed that a decree be drawn up in terms of the award. The petitioner in this case did not file an appeal under Section 17, Arbitration Act because it is stated before me there was no ground for such an appeal. The complaint of the petitioner is against the order of the Munsiff over-ruling his objections to the filing of the award. An appeal lies against such a decision, under Section 39(1)(vi), Arbitration Act. It is not disputed on behalf of the petitioner that ordinarily such an appeal was competent. What is contended for is that the appeal was not competent in this case because by the same order which overruled his objections to the filing of the a...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Nagina Singh Vs. Governor-general in Council
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1952Cal306
Sinha, J.1. This is a suit for recovery of Rs. 18,011-3-3 on account of price of bricks supplied by the plff. to the Chief Engineer, Eastern Command & alternatively as compensation.2. The plff. is a manufacturer of bricks & has a brickfield at, among other places, Ballykhab in the district of Howrah. In January, 1942 an order was promulgated by the Govt. of Bengal in exercise of powers conferred by Clause (a) Sub-R. (2) of R. 81, Defence of India Rules, to the effect that no first & second class bricks manufactured in brick kilns within the areas specified in the order should be disposed of by sale or otherwise without a written permit issued by the Chief Controller of prices, Bengal or any officer authorised by him in writing in that behalf. The Sadar Sub-Division of the district of Howrah within which Ballykhal is situate is one of the areas specified in the said order.3. On 2-12-1943, the Controller of bricks, Bengal, issued three permits, viz., Permit Nos. 1604, 1605 & 1606, whereb...
Tag this Judgment!Chintaharan Ghose and ors. Vs. Gujaraddi Sheik and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1951Cal456
R.P. Mookerjee, J.1. This is a pltfs. appeal in a representative suit brought under Rule 8 of Order 1, Civil P. C., on behalf of the Hindus of the village of Alampur against the Muslims of the same village for a declaration that the suit land is one in which the public has got the right of use as playground or grazing ground etc., & for an injunction to restrain the defts. from using the land as a burial ground.2. The pltfs.' case is that in Khatian No. 159/1 of Mouza Alampur covering an area of 3 bighas & 1 cottah, 1 bigha & 2 cottahs was a graveyard of the Muslims of that village & the remaining 1 bigha and 19 cottah was used by the villagers as a football ground. This football ground is also claimed to be used as a grazing ground for the cattle of the villagers. There had been a previous litigation in respect of this property in 1928 when a representative suit was brought on behalf of the Muslims of that village for a declaration that the lands covered by the entire Khatian were bur...
Tag this Judgment!Province of Bengal Vs. Amulya Dhon Addy and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1950Cal356,54CWN297
R.C. Mitter, J. 1. Premises No. 19, Surah Third Lane, was acquired for the purpose of Improvement Scheme No. IV (Maniktolla) made by the Board of Trustees for the Improvement of Calcutta and sanctioned by the Local Government under the provisions of the Calcutta Improvement Act, v [5] of 1911 B. C. The said premises was at all material times an open piece of land comprising an area of 10 bighas 12 cottas 36 square ft. There were two tanks within it. It abutted on the Sura third Lane which was to its East. It had a vista on a blind lane which stopped at a point of its Southern boundary. There was no roadway on the acquired premises in continuation of that blind lane. The said blind lane is a public one. The plot is shown in the Key plan, EX. 1. On 27th August 1943 the Collector made his award. He gave Rs. 61548-14-0 for the land, Rs. 725 for the trees and Rs. 9311-1.0 as statutory allowance--total Rs. 71614-15 odd.2. The claimants, who are the respondents before us, were dissatisfied wi...
Tag this Judgment!Mahomed Akbar Abdulla Fazalbhoy Vs. the Official Liquidator
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1950Bom217; (1950)52BOMLR40
Chagla, C.J.1. This is an appeal from an order of Tendolkar J. dismissing a summons taken out by the appellant. The summons was for altering the list 'A' of contributories by excluding the name of the applicant therefrom in respect of 876 shares of the A. B. C. company and by substituting therein for the name of the applicant-appellant the name of Casamalli Munjee in respect of 676 shares and the name of Dr. Jivraj N. Mehta in respect of 200 shares and also for altering the list 'B' of the contributories of the company by excluding the name of the appellant in respect of 15 shares of the company shown therein and by substituting therein for the name of the appellant the name of Gasamalli Munjee.2. The appellant was a director of the Associated Banking Corporation, Ltd., which is now in liquidation, and he applied for and was allotted 1000 shares of the company on 18th August 1942. He had one more share, being the signatory to the memorandum of association and that share was given to hi...
Tag this Judgment!Bankim Chandra Paira and anr. Vs. Anand Bazar Patrika and anr.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1950Cal129
Lahiri, J.1. This Rule was issued upon the Editor, Printer and Publisher of the Ananda Bazar Fatrika and the Swaraj O Sangathan to show cause why they should not be committed for contempt for publications in their respective newspapers of news items published on 5th July 1949 and 8th July 1949 respectively under the captions 'Narayangarh--Midnapore' and 'Paddy looted during broad day light'. The Ananda Bazar Patrika is a very influential and popular Bengali daily published from Calcutta and enjoying a very large circulation amongst the Bengali speaking population of this province and also beyond its borders. The Swaraj O Sangathan is also an influential Bengali Weekly published by the District Congress Office, Midnapore.2. An official translation of the publication in the Ananda Bazar Patrika runs as follows:'Narayangarh (Midnapore)Trouble created by Communists--The Communists looted away about 70 maunds of paddy in broad daylight from a paddy granary of Laxmi Narayan Prodhan in villag...
Tag this Judgment!Jahnabi Prosad Banerjee and anr. Vs. Basudeb Paul and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1950Cal536,54CWN626
G.N. Das, J.1. This rule was obtained by the defendants againt the decision of Mr. Subodh Chandra Mukherjee, learned Subordinate Judge, 1st Additional Court, Alipur, District 24 Parganas; whereby he decreed the suit filed by the plaintiff for setting aside the election of ward No. V of Naihati Municipality. 2. The relevant facts are that Basudeo Paul Opposite party No. 1 filed his nomination paper as a candidate from Ward V for the impending election of the Naihati Municipality. The nomination paper was rejected by the Chairman of the Municipality; an appeal to the District Magistrate was dismissed. The election then took place and petitioner No. 1 was declared elected from the general seat in Ward V and Petitioner No. 2 was declared elected from the reserved seat. The opposite party No. 1 then brought the present suit being Title Suit No. 32 of 1946 in the Court of the District Judge, Alipur for a declaration that the rejection of his nomination paper by the Election Authorities of th...
Tag this Judgment!Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1950Cal551,[1950]18ITR112(Cal)
Harries, C.J. 1. This is a Reference made by the Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench, under Section 66(1), Income-tax Act stating a case upon the following question:'Whether in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the fact that the applicant company is 'Resident in British India,' Section 42 has been validly invoked.' 2. The assessee was a limited liability company having its head office at Calcutta and a factory at Okara in British India where cloth was manufactured. The cloth so manufactured was sold by the assessee on a wholesale basis both within and without British India. During the year of account, the assessee had three selling offices in certain Indian States. The goods sold at these centres were sent out from the factory at a profit margin of 9 per cent, on cost.3. The Income-tax Officer dealing with the assessment for the relevant year came to the conclusion that on the facts which I have set cut the provisions of Section 42, Income-tax Act, were applicable and he ...
Tag this Judgment!Santimmappa Venkappa Konnur Vs. Balbhim Co-operative Credit Society of ...
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1950Bom313; (1950)52BOMLR112
Bavdekar J.1. The respondent Co-operative Credit Society had obtained an award in 1929 for Rs. 576-13-3 against one Basawwa under the Co-operative Societies Act. The property in suit was sold in execution of that award on 15th February 1934. It appears that prior to this sale the property in suit had already been attached by another creditor and the sale price was distributed between the respondent Cooperative Credit Society and the other creditor, but there has been a compromise subsequently between the latter and the auction purchaser of the property and we will not be concerned with him, therefore, in the present appeal. The respondent Co-operative Credit Society refused to compromise the matter and consequently the suit has come to this Court. The reason why the auction purchaser was required to file a suit is that on 15th February 1934, one person claiming to be the adopted son of Basawwa adopted on 29th January 1930, seed the auction purchaser after he had been put into possessio...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 6751
- 6752
- 6753
- 6754
- 6755
- 6757
- 6758
- 6759
- 6760
- 6761
- Next ›
- Last »