Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Sorted by: old Court: kolkata Year: 1969 Page 2 of about 17 results (0.022 seconds)

Jul 14 1969 (HC)

Coal Products Private Ltd. and anr. Vs. Income-tax Officer, m Ward and ...

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jul-14-1969

Reported in : [1972]85ITR347(Cal)

..... of notice, the person should be under an existing obligation to pay amounts to the assessee. any other interpretation of the provision is likely to hamper the normal freedom of contract which citizens do possess in spite of taxing enactments. any notice issued by the department under section 46(5a) upon an alleged garnishee cannot hang upon him like a damocles ..... the repealed act attaching all payments due to baliah.19. on 28th march, 1960, a date between the service of the first and second notices, the petitioner entered into a contract with baliah for playing in a film for a consolidated remuneration of rs. 20,000. this amount was paid to baliah between 28th march, 1960, and 18th march, 1961, prior ..... stood attached and that it should be credited to the government. the firm sent a reply on june 26, 1959, stating that it had not engaged baliah and had no contract with him. nothing happened for two years and, in the meantime, income-tax payable by baliah amounted to rs. 86,111.12. on march 21, 1961, the income-tax officer ..... ' sword and prevent him from entering into any contract with the assessee thereafter and from paying him any money under that contract. in our opinion, such a position cannot be envisaged and it is certainly not warranted by the language of the enactment.....an act cannot .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 13 1969 (HC)

Biraj Mohan Bhattacharjee Vs. Ajit Kumar Basu and anr.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Aug-13-1969

Reported in : AIR1971Cal266,75CWN156

..... 13 (1) is the default committed by a tenant either in not paying rent in terms of section 4 (2) i.e. within the time fixed by contract or in absence of such contract, by the fifteenth day of the month next following the month for which it is payable or under section 21 (1) in not validly depositing the rent with .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 20 1969 (HC)

Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Smt. Nandarani Dassi

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Aug-20-1969

Reported in : AIR1970Cal200,74CWN43

bijayesh mukherji, j. 1. by this suit raised on january 28, 1958, the life insurance corporation of india (shortened into lic hereafter, as far as possible), prays for a decree under order 34, rule 4 of the civil procedure code (5 of 1908) in form no. 5-a in appendix d in the first schedule thereto, on the foot of two mortgages, the details whereof are set out below: 1.mortgage-deed bearing date november 29, 1946 exhibit a: principal sum-rs. 29,000.002.deed of further charge bearing date january 19, 1949, exhibit b: principal sum-rs. 5,000.00 3.annual interest at 7% a compound up to janu-ary 27, 1958, minus cre- dit of sums received towards interest-rs. 20,247.714.total-rs. 50,247.712. the mortgagor is the sole defendant to this suit, smt. nandorani dassi qua trustee to the estate of late modhoo sooden sain, her father-in-law. the property mortgaged is the divided 4/21st share in the then 116 cotton street, now numbered as '114/1b', and admeasuring 1 cottah 14 chittacks and 3 square feet. the mortgagee is india provident company, ltd., the statutory successor of which is lic, the present plaintiff. 3. the pleas, nandorani, the defendant, resists the suit with, are-one, she had not received the full consideration money for either of the two mortgages. two, a pardanashin lady, with little education, she had had no independent advice ever. three, she never fully understood the import or effect of the two mortgages. 4. the issues raised at the trial are: 1. did the india .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 20 1969 (HC)

Dalim Kumar SaIn and ors. Vs. Smt. Nandarani Dassi and anr.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Aug-20-1969

Reported in : AIR1970Cal292,73CWN877

..... such intention. as cotton, l.j. observes at page 14 of the report:'now no one for a moment doubts that where it is shewn that the actual contract and intention of the contracting parties was different from that which is expressed in the deed, the court has jurisdiction to alter it. but there is an enormous difference between altering a settlement ..... as this the case that at once conies to one's mind is firm sriniwas ram kumar v. mahabir prasad, : [1951]2scr277 , where a suit for, specific performance of a contract simpliciter was decreed for recovery of rupees 30,000, on the admission of the defendants that they did take a loan of rs. 30,000, though the case pleaded by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 11 1969 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, W.B. Iii Vs. Chunilal Prabhudas and Co. (D ...

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Sep-11-1969

Reported in : AIR1971Cal70,[1970]76ITR566(Cal)

..... and offer delivery of possession of the said partnership business together with all its assets and liabilities, its entire goodwill including the benefits of the existing and/or the unexpired contracts and agreements, import and export quota rights, permits or licenses together with the entire liabilities as a going concern to the said limited company'. the recitals also use the expression ..... being in the nature of capital expenditure or personal expenditure laid out or expended wholly or exclusively for the purpose of the said business. lord bowen in city of london contract corpn. ltd. v. styles (1887) 2 tax cas 239 at p. 243 expressed the view that money expended not for the purpose of carrying on a concern, but to acquire .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 15 1969 (HC)

East India Construction Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Sep-15-1969

Reported in : AIR1970Cal243

..... difference between the two arbitrators ..................(e) subject as aforesaid, the arbitration act, 1940 and the rules thereunder and any statutory notification thereof shall apply to the arbitration proceedings under this contract;' in accordance with the said procedure for appointment of two arbitrators the general manager appointed mr. ramani, officer on special duty, south eastern railway, garden reach as the arbitrator, being ..... , as stated above, stand on a different footing inasmuch as a new situation has arisen after the commencement of reference proceedings by two validly appointed arbitrators in terms of the contract. mr. hazra had made it clear that his client has to make the present application under section 8 of the arbitration act as no other section in the act, according .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 21 1969 (HC)

Rabindra Nath Das Vs. Sarat Chandra Parui

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Nov-21-1969

Reported in : AIR1971Cal159,74CWN952

p.n. mookerjee, j.1. the appellant before us was the defendant in the instant suit for specific performance. the suit was instituted by the plaintiff respondent for specific performance of an agreement of reconveyance of immovable property.2. during the pendency of the suit, however, the right of the plaintiff under the said agreement was sold in auction in execution of a rent decree against him and purchased by the present appellant. upon that footing, it was contended that the plaintiff's right, title and interest under the disputed agreement having vested in the defendant, the suit was no longer maintainable and that it should be dismissed. this contention was accepted by the learned munsif and, on appeal, the learned munsif's decision, dismissing the plaintiff's suit, was affirmed by the learned subordinate judge.3. on second appeal to this court, however, that decision was reversed and the plaintiff's suit was decreed on the sole ground that the acquisition of the plaintiff's right under the agreement in question by the defendant having taken place during the pendency of this suit, it was hit by the doctrine of lis pendens and could not affect the plaintiff.4. in our view, however, the above reasoning would not be sound. the doctrine of lis pendens cannot be availed of by the transferor and it is really intended for the protection of the other party, that is, the party in the suit other than the transferor. (vide shyam lal v. sohan lal, ilr 50 all 290 = (air 1928 all 3) .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //