Kolkata Court December 1971 Judgments
Bata Shoe Company Pvt. Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise and ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-24-1971
Reported in: 1979(4)ELT464(Cal)
P.B. Mukharji, C.J.1. This is an appeal by Data Shoe Company Private Limited from the judgment and order of P.K. Banerjee J. dated the September 25, 1970, in Civil Revision Case No. 297(W) of 1970.2. The grounds taken in the appeal are that the learned Judge cried in interpretation of the intent and scope of Section 4 and the Explanation thereto of the Central Excises and Salt Act of 1944 and the rules made thereunder. The essence of that allegation is that the learned Judge failed to appreciate that under the provisions of Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt: Act, the 'value' of any article must first be determined after deducting the trade discount allowance and the amount of duty payable from the wholesale cash price. It is also alleged that the learned Judge was in error in so far as Item No. 36 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 indicates that duty will be paid ad valorem on footwear and therefore it was imperative first to arrive at the 'value' ...
Tag this Judgment!Sandersons and Morgans Vs. Income-tax Officer, a Ward and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-23-1971
Reported in: [1973]87ITR270(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukhakji, J. 1. The petitioner is a firm of solicitors. This firm is registered under the Indian Partnership Act. According to the petitioner the petitioner-firm had been continuously carrying on profession as solicitors constituted as a partnership firm for a period of 4/5 years and even for lesser periods at a time. Usually, according to the petitioner, at the end of each period if some of the partners retired, new partners were taken in the place of the retired partners and also in case of death of any one of them. During the period 1st January, 1956, to 3Ist January, 1960, the petitioner-firm consisted of one David Platt (since deceased), Adwaita Nath Sil (since deceased), Heramba Nath Bhattacharjee (since deceased), Framjee Cursetjee Hierjeebhoy Rustomjee, Sudhir Kumar De Mullick and Basil Gill (since deceased). From 1st January, 1956, till 31st December, 1960, the petitioner-firm was constituted and/or evidenced by a partnership deed and was registered as a partnership...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Salila Chandra Vs. Rev. Hiran Kumar Das Gupta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-21-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Cal189,76CWN234
Sankar Prasad Mitra, J.1. This is an application under Section 115of the Code. By Rule obtained on the 3rd May, 1971, the petitioner assails an order of the District Judge. 24 Parganas being order No. 4 dated 12-1-1971, in O.S. No. 47 of 1970 (Mrs. Salila Chandra v. Rev. Hiran Kumar Gupta). It appears that the petitioner made an application for probate in respect of the estate of one Miss Salila Ghosh alias Miss S. Ghosh in the Court of the District Delegate on the 27th September. 1969. After this application was made the West Bengal Court-fees Ordinance, 1969 (West Bengal Ordinance No. XVII of 1969) was promulgated on the 15th December, 1969. Section 50(2) of this Ordinance was as follows:'All suits and proceedings instituted before the commencement of this Ordinance and all proceedings by way of appeal, revision or otherwise arising therefrom whether instituted before or after such commencement shall, notwithstanding the repeal of the Court-fees Act. 1870. be governed by the provisio...
Tag this Judgment!Bisadendu Biswas Vs. Mst. Sakina Begum and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-20-1971
Reported in: AIR1973Cal135
S.C. Ghose, J.1. This suit has been filed by the plaintiff who is a Solicitor of this Court for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 2,000/- as his remuneration under a contract dated November 20, 1963, whereby the defendant No. 1 authorised the plaintiff to do certain acts, namely;(a) To negotiate the sale of the premises No. 43. Ripon Street belonging to the defendant No. 1 at Rs. 1,10,000/- free from all encumbrances with a stipulation that vacant possession of only one flat in the first floor in the occupation of the defendant No, 1 was to be given to the purchaser. (b) To negotiate cancellation of an existing agreement for sale of the said property. (c) To act for the defendant No. 1 In regard to the transaction of sale. 2. The agreement between the parties is contained in a letter dated 20th November, 1963, written to the plaintiff by the defendant No. 1 and accepted by the plaintiff.3. The plaintiff duly negotiated for the sale of the said premises with one Sudhangsu Prakash Ganguli of ...
Tag this Judgment!M.S. Ram Singh Vs. Bijoy Singh Surana and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-17-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Cal190,76CWN217
Salil Kumar Datta, J.1. This is an appeal by the tenant defendant under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent The suit was dismissed by the learned Judge, Third Bench. City Civil Court, Calcutta. On appeal Chittatosh Mookerjee. J. set aside the judgment and decree under appeal and decreed the suit.2. The case in the plaint is as follows: The defendant was a monthly tenant under the plaintiff Oswal Jain & Co.. in respect of certain rooms and one kitchen in the fifth floor of premises No. 7/1C. Lindsay Street, Calcutta (described in the schedule to the plaint and hereinafter referred to as the suit premises) at a monthly rent of Rs. 223.84p, the tenancy being according to English calendar month. The tenancy was determined by notice to quit, duly served on the defendant, with expiry of September, 1961. It was alleged that the defendant had sub-let his tenancy without the previous consent in writing of the plaintiff and as such was not entitled to any protection under the West Bengal Premises Te...
Tag this Judgment!Debi Mata Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-14-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Cal497,76CWN308
ORDERAnil Kumar Sen, J.1. In these five Rules the petitioners are challenging three notifications and two proclamations issued by the State of West Bengal or its Authorities. As common questions have been raised in ell these Rules they have been heard together and would be disposed of by one judgment.2. It is not in dispute that facts relevant to the issues raised in these five Writ petitions are same or similar and as such I prefer to set out the facts in Civil Rule 656 (W) of 1964. The petitioner in this Rule Sri Sri Devi Mata is the family Deity of Panchkote Raj Estate. The petitioner had been holding certain lands in intermediary interest in Purulia which was previously within the District of Man-bhum in the State of Bihar. On September 1 1956 the Bihar and West Bengal (Transfer of Territories) Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Transfer of Territories Act) came into force. By virtue of Section 3 of this Act major part of Purulia was transferred with effect from 1-11-1956 to...
Tag this Judgment!State of West Bengal Vs. Ganesh Chandra Mitra and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-10-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Cal333
M. M. Dutt, J.1. These two appeals at the instance of the State of West Bengal are against the awards passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Purulia, in two land acquisition cases under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.2- The property acquired is a premises comprising buildings, land and a tank- The premises is known as 'Kamala Kutir'. The notification under Section 4 of the Act in respect of the acquisition of Kamala Kutir was published on May 16, 1960. The description of the premises and the buildings, fixtures and other amenities appertaining thereto, appear from the following portion of the judgment of the learned Additional District Judge, as follows :--'The premises 'Kamala Kutir' stand on 7.91 acres of land with a compound wall on all sides measuring 7 ft. 6 inches in height and 1931 Rft. in length. Within this boundary-wall, there was a Bungalow having a plinth area of 6061 Rft., with terraced roof on rolled steel joists and tees, all walls 20' thick at su...
Tag this Judgment!A.C. Mukherjee and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-10-1971
Reported in: (1972)IILLJ297Cal
P.B. Mukharji, C.J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment and order or Mr. Justice Pradyot Kumar Banerjee discharging a rule under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. The petitioner in this rule challenged an order passed by the respondent No. 4, Indian Airlines, dated the 7th of March, 1969, whereby the said respondent communicated an order to the respondent No. 5, Air Corporation Employees' Union, that in view of the recognition granted to the Indian Aircraft Technicians' Association, which is respondent No. 6, the Air Corporation Employees' Union will not be any longer entitled to represent the categories specified in the said letter. The petitioners are 15 in number. They are all employees of the Indian Airlines. Some of the members of the respondent No. 5 union are employed as technical staff and some of them are clerical. It is stated that the petitioners are all technical staff working under the respondent No. 4 Indian Airlines.3. The prayers in the petition were for the...
Tag this Judgment!State of West Bengal Vs. Secretary, Union Club, Purulia
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-09-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Cal225,76CWN296
M.M. Dutt, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the State of West Bengal against the award dated August 24, 1964, of the learned District Judge. Purulia, under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 2. The appellant State of West Bengal acquired 1.35 acres of land appertaining to certain plots belonging to the respondent, the Union Club of Purulia. The relevant notification under Section 4 of the Act was published on September 4, 1952 and the declaration under Section 6 of the Act was published long thereafter on February 2, 1961. 3. The Land Acquisition Collector classified the land as Bastu I land and Bastu II land. He valued the Bastu I land at Rs. 9,800/- per acre and the Bastu II land at Rs. 7,800/- per acre. On the basis of the said rates the Land Acquisition Collector made an award of Rupees 15,313.40 as compensation for the land acquired. Being aggrieved by the said award of the Collector, the respondent made an application for a referen...
Tag this Judgment!Rabindra Nath Sinha Roy Vs. the Divisional Commissioner, Burdwan Divis ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-09-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Cal447,76CWN378
ORDERAnil Kumar Sinha, J.1. This Rule is directed against an order passed by the Divisional Commissioner in appeal modifying the order of the Additional District Magistrate, Estates Acquisition, Hooghly, imposing upon the petitioner fine for removing sands from his land.2. The petitioner claims to he the owner of certain plots of land on a portion of which, it is alleged, he was under dire necessity of digging a tank. In course of excavation some sands came out which were kept on his own land not for the purpose of either selling or making any profit. Even then a case was started against the petitioner under Sub-sections (2-A) and (2-B) of Section 4 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1956, which was introduced by amendment by West Bengal Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1966. The Additional District Magistrate, Estate Acquisition, who heard the case, imposed a fine of Rs. 1,500/-, hut this fine of Rs. 1,500/- was reduced to Rs. 1,000/- on appeal before the Divisional Commissioner.3. It ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »