Kolkata Court January 1973 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Stadmed (P.) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer, h Ward and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-1973
Reported in: [1974]97ITR104(Cal)
T.K. Basu, J. 1. In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner, Stadmed (P.) Ltd., challenges a notice dated the 27th March, 1967, issued by the Income-tax Officer, 'H' Ward, Companies Dist. V, Calcutta, under Section 274 read with Section 271 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'.2. The facts of this case lie within a very short compass and are not disputed. The assessment year with which we are concerned is 1962-63. The impugned notice was issued on the 27th March, 1967, whereas the order of assessment for that year was made on the 29th March, 1967, that is, two days subsequent to the date of the issue of the notice of penalty. Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee, draws my attention to Section 274(2) of the Act, which is in the following terms :. '274. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in Clause (iii) of Sub-section (1) of Section 271, if in a case falling under Clause (c) of th...
Santosh Saha Vs. State and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-1973
Reported in: 1973CriLJ968
ORDERN.C. Talukdar, J.1. This Rule is directed against an order dated the 1st July. 1972 passed bv Shri D. B. Dutta, Magistrate 1st class, Barrackpore rejecting the application filed bv the accused-petitioner on the 8th December. 1971. purporting to be one under Section 337, Criminal Procedure Code and praying for issuing process-against one Janaki Ballav Mukherjee as the co-accused and then proceed further with the enquiry.2. The background of facts necessary for considering the points at issue may be stated briefly. A petition of complaint was filed on 4-11-67 in the Court of the learned Sub-divisional Magistrate. Barrackpore by the complainant-opposite party no. 2 Sachindra Nath Das. against the present accused-petitioner Santosh Kumar Saha, under Sections 408/420/120B /34 of the Indian Penal Code containing a list of witnesses which included one Janaki Ballav Mukheriee as witness no. 20. The prosecution case inter alia is that in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy with Janaki Bal...
S.K. Mukherjee Vs. Smt. Saila Bala SeIn and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-11-1973
Reported in: AIR1973Cal430,77CWN492
ORDERAmiya Prosad Das, J.1. This Rule was obtained by the tenant defendant in a suit for ejectment and is directed against an order of the learned Munsiff of the Third Court, Howrah, rejecting his application under Section 17 (2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act 1956. The plaintiffs, who are the opposite parties Nos. 1-5 in this Rule, brought the suit for ejectment on the grounds of default, subletting and reasonable requirement. According to the plaintiffs' case, the tenant defendant No. 1 is a defaulter in payment of rent since November 1968. Admittedly, the defendant No. 1, who is the petitioner in the present Rule, was a tenant in respect of the suit premises under opposite parties Nos. 1-5 at a monthly rent of Rs. 60/- payable according to English calendar month. The petitioner also admits that rent was not being paid since November 1968, the reason given by him being that he claimed adjustment for Rs. 364/- which he paid as Municipal taxes on behalf of the plaintiffs and a...
i.K. Merchants Ltd. Vs. Indra Prakash Karnani
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-10-1973
Reported in: AIR1973Cal306
S.K. Hazra, J.1. This is an applicationby the plaintiff decree-holder for execution of the balance amount of the decree dated July 2, 1958, to be realised by arrest and detention in civil prison of the defendant judgment-debtor Indra Prakash Karnani.2. This application was made on December 9, 1971 and a notice was issued by this court under Order 21, Rule 22 (i) (a) and Rule 31 (i) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The judgment-debtor Indra Prakash Karnani has appeared pursuant to the said notice and is opposing this application. Parameswar Santhalia, a Director of the plaintiff company has affirmed an affidavit on December 6, 1971 which is used in support of the application of the plaintiff decree-holder. On January 24, 1972 the judgment-debtor has also affirmed an affidavit denying and disputing the claim for execution of the decree as aforesaid.3. The facts relating to this application are shortly as follows:--On July 19, 1956, the plaintiff company instituted a suit against the defen...
Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd. Vs. Third Industrial Tribunal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-10-1973
Reported in: AIR1973Cal315
Amaresh Roy, J. 1. This appeal is against an Order passed by our learned brother Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. in a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in which proceeding the application, made on behalf of the present appellant, praying for setting aside the abatement and substitution of the heirs of the deceased respondent, has been dismissed. That proceeding which is matter No. 178 of 1970 Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd. v. Third Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal, had arisen upon an application by Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd. under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the correctness and/or validity of an order made by the Third Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal. The circumstances providing the background of facts are that an industrial dispute was pending before the said Tribunal and during the pendency of that proceeding before the Tribunal two employees, viz. Tarapada Bhattacharjee and Vivekananda Boss were dismissed by the Company on the ground of certain ...
Sudhangshu Sekhar Maity and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-10-1973
Reported in: AIR1973Cal475,77CWN706
Sankar Prasad Mitra, C.J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment and order of A.K. Sen, J., dated the 14th February, : AIR1972Cal320 .2. The appellants are 61 in number. They made an application under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging certain acquisitions of land in the district of Midna-pore for purposes of the Haldia Dock. The facts, briefly, are that on the 5th May, 1959, the Government of West Bengal issued a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, in respect of lands in 68 villages in the district of Midnapore 'likely to be needed for a public purpose, viz., for the establishment of a subsidiary Port at the mouth of Haldia River'. By this notification the Engineers of the Commissioners for the Port of Calcutta and certain other officers were authorised to enter upon and survey lands and to do all other works required for the purpose of execution of the work.3. This notification under Section 4 dated the 5th May, 1959, was not followed by any dec...
Bibhuti Bhusan Ray and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-09-1973
Reported in: AIR1973Cal262
Murari Mohan Dutt, J.1. This appeal is at the instance of the plaintiffs and it arises out of a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 2177-8-3 pies.2. The ease of the plaintiff is that, one Mahammad Ramjan is a thika tenant under the plaintiffs in respect of two plots of land known as Municipal Huts Nos. 6 and 17 appertaining to the premises No. 145-B, Chittaranian Avenue, Calcutta, belonging to the plaintiffs. The said tenant deposited rents and taxes in the years 1953, 1954 and 1955 in the Court of the Registrar Presidency Small Cause Court. Calcutta acting as the Thika Controller, Calcutta, to the credit of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs made two applications before the Thika Controller pravina for withdrawal of. the rents and taxes deposited by the said tenant in respect of Municipal Huts Nos. 6 and 17. On February 4, 1956. the Thika Controller paid the plaintiffs certain sums of money on account of rents and taxes deposited by the said tenant but did not pay the sum of Rs. 1315-6-6 pi...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hindusthan Housing and Land Development ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-09-1973
Reported in: [1977]108ITR380(Cal)
A.N. Sen, J. 1. In this reference under Section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the following question of law has been referred to this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the extra amount of compensation amounting to Rs. 7,24,914 was income arising or accruing to the assessee during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1956-57?'2. The facts material for the purpose of this reference have been fully set out in the statement of the case and may be briefly noticed. The assessee is a limited company dealing in land. Certain plots of land measuring more or less 19.17 acres, equivalent to about 57 bighas 19 cott., in the village Kankulia, P. S. Tollygunge, District 24-Parganas, which belonged to the assessee were requisitioned by the Government of West Bengal by an order dated 21st June, 1967 (sic) under the provisions of Rule 75A(1) of the Defence of India Rules read with Section 19 of the Defence of India Act. Thereafter, the State Govern...
S.S. Garga Vs. the Coal Controller and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-09-1973
Reported in: (1973)ILLJ575Cal
ORDERWhereas the President is of the opinion that it is in the public interest to do so,Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (j) of Rule 56 of the Fundamental Rules the President hereby give notice to Sri S. S. Garga, holder in the permanent post of Secretary to the Coal Controller, that he having already attained the age of 50 years on 11-11-68 shall retire from service from the date of expiry of three months computed from the date of the service of this notice on him.S.B. Lal,Joint Secretary of theGovernment of India.2. In the writ petition to this Court the petitioner primarily made out two grounds for his challenge to the order. In the first place, setting out in great details the invaluable service he had rendered to the different authorities he had served, which was not only appreciated but was commended from time to time, he has disputed the existence of the requisite satisfaction and the existence of any reason whatsoever which can support an order unde...
Satish Chandra Karmakar and ors. Vs. Shaikh Sahadat Hossain
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-08-1973
Reported in: AIR1973Cal264,1973CriLJ102
Salil Kumar Datta, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant against a judgment of affirmance. The plaintiff instituted the suit on the following allegations: The suit land covered by C. S. Dags 171, 172 and 173 measuring .97 decimals khatian No. 65 published under the Non-agricultural Land Assessment Act (Bengal Act XIX of 1936). situate Mouja Manirampore P. L. S. Barrackpore within North Barrackpore Municipality, with structures on portion of dag No. 171 belonged to the plaintiff. The structures and land appertaining thereto measuring .10 decimals are recorded as R. S. dag Nos. 171/198 and 171/199 which are in khas possession of the plaintiff. The remaining land with tank recorded in dag No. 172 measuring .20 decimals. Pahar of Tank recorded in day No. 173 measuring .08 decimals and the remaining portion of dag No. 171 measuring .59 decimals, in all .87 decimals was settled by the plaintiff with the defendant at a monthly rent of Rs. 10-6-8 p. or annual rent of Rs. 125/-for three years...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »