Kolkata Court March 1974 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.
Sattar Sheikh Vs. Fazalu Bibi and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-1974
Reported in: 1975CriLJ1146
ORDERA.K. De, J.1. This petition is by the husband. The opposite party filed an application under Section 488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure On 22-12-69 claiming maintenance from the petitioner her husband at the rate of Rs. 80/- per month, She stated that she lived in her husband's house for sometime, but was driven out by him after assaulting her mercilessly and that he is not maintaining her from that date though he has sufficient means.2. The husband filed show-cause on 20-6-1970 stating that he divorced the petitioner by executing a deed of Talak on the 5th of Jaistha 1376 B. S. and that she is not entitled to claim any maintenance from him The learned Magistrate by his order dated 13-1-1973 allowed the wife's petition directing payment of Rs. 50/- per month as maintenance from the date of filing of her application i.e., 22-12-1969. He has rejected the plea of the husband that the petitioner was divorced by him. Against that order the husband moved the Sessions Judge in an appl...
Shambhunath Pal and ors. Vs. Indian Iron and Steel Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Cal194,79CWN95
R. Bhattacharya, J.1. This second appeal has been directed against the judgment and the decree passed by the Additional District Judge, Burdwan in Title Appeal No. 56 of 1956 affirming substantially with a minor modification the decision dated 30th July, 1956, passed by Sri B. C. Das Gupta, Munsif, 1st Court, Asansol, in Title Suit No. 201 of 1953. The appellants are Shambhunath Pal and others, the heirs and legal representatives of one Chandrabinode Pal, who was the defendant in the original suit. The plaintiff-respondent is the Indian Iron and Steel Company Ltd.2. In short, the case of the Indian Iron and Steel Co. Ltd., hereafter referred to as the Company, was that Chandrabinode Pal took a monthly lease of the suit land by executing a deed at a monthly rental of Rs. 7/8/- according to English calendar month for a period of one year starting from the 1st of January, 1939 till the end of the English calendar year 1939. It was stipulated in that deed amongst other things that Chandrab...
Gadadhar Dey and anr. Vs. Tax Recovery Officer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1974
Reported in: [1974]44CompCas514(Cal),[1974]96ITR543(Cal)
Deb, J. 1. In this writ application, the petitioners have challenged the jurisdiction of the respondents to issue two notices both dated July 31, 1967,and to proceed against them under two notices both dated May 3, 1973, in the following circumstances : G. Dey & Company (Contractors) Private Ltd., hereinafter stated as the company, is the assessee under the Income-tax Act. The company is liable to pay the assessed tax of Rs. 690'82 and Rs. 5,212.88, respectively, for the assessment years 1952-53 and 1953-54. The petitioner No. 1 was a director and the petitioner No. 2 was a shareholder of the company for the above period. They have sold their shares in 1962 and the petitioner No. 1 has ceased to be a director of the company since then. 2. The impugned notices of July, 1967, were served on the petitioner No. 1 in the tax recovery proceedings started against the company. Thereafter, the impugned notices of February, 1973, were served on the company and the premises No. 3, Robinson Street...
income-tax Officer, c Ward and ors. Vs. Luxmi Prasad Goenka
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1974
Reported in: [1977]110ITR674(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. This appeal relates to the assessment for income-tax for the assessment year 1950-51. On March 28, 1956, return for the said year was filed by the assessee showing an income of Rs. 3,148. Thereafter, on April 9, 1956, a revised return was filed showing an income of Rs. 3,421. On March 17, 1959, a notice under Section 34(1)(a) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, was served on the assessee. On July 16, 1959, the assessee filed the return pursuant to the aforesaid notice under Section 34(1)(a).The impugned assessment in question was completed on January 29, 1960. The assessment was under Section 23(4)/34(1)(a) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. It appears that prior thereto there had been notice issued under Section 23(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and notice had also been issued under Section 37 of the said Act. As the question relates to the legality of the assessment it would be necessary to set out the relevant portion from the assessment order :'No...
Mcleod and Co. and ors. Vs. S.K. Ganguly and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1974
Reported in: [1975]45CompCas563(Cal),79CWN132
B.C. Mitra, J. 1. The Craig Jute Mills Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ' the company ') was incorporated in 1918 under the Indian Companies Act, 1913. The authorised share capital of the company was originally Rs. 60,00,000 divided into 50,000 preference shares of Rs. 100 each and 3,00,000 ordinary shares of Rs. 10 each. Subsequently, in 1928, the ordinary share capital of the company was reduced to Rs. 7,50,000 divided into 3,00,000 ordinary shares of Rs. 2-8-0. The company's capital was further reduced in 1940 by reducing the face value of the preference shares from Rs. 100 each to Rs. 50 each and by further reducing the face value of the ordinary shares from Rs. 2-8-0 to annas 8 each. 2. The object for which the company was formed was to carry on the business of spinners, weavers, manufacturers, bailers and pressers of jute, jute cuttings, jute rejections, hemp, cotton, etc. After incorporation, the company commenced its business of manufacturing jute goods and also dealt in raw ju...
Bharat Traders Vs. Commercial Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1974
Reported in: [1977]39STC206(Cal)
Murari Mohan Dutt, J.1. This Rule is directed against a notice dated 15th June, 1970, issued by the Commercial Tax Officer, Siliguri, under Section 20A of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, hereinafter referred to as the Act. It has been alleged in the notice that in the returns for the first, second and third quarters of the Ratha Jatra years 2026-2027 S.Y., the taxable sales on account of sales of containers sold along with Schedule I goods have been concealed, leading to the under-statement of the taxable sales.2. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the Act. The petitioner submitted returns of its turnover for the aforesaid period corresponding to 16th June, 1969, to 15th June, 1970. In these returns, the petitioner has shown the entire sale price of mustard oil sold in sealed containers for the relevant period in Clause (i) of the returns and claimed deduction of the entire sale price of mustard oil under Clause 3(i) of the returns. The copies of the returns have bee...
Kumud Ranjan Banerjee Vs. Manabendra Banerjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-07-1974
Reported in: AIR1974Cal342
A.K. Janah, J.1. This Rule is directed against the judgment and order dated October 5, 1972 passed by the Additional District Judge. 12th Court, Alipore in Misc. Appeal No. 133 of 1972. By the said order the learned Additional District Judge set aside the order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, 2nd Court, Alipore rejecting the application filed by the plaintiff-opposite party for appointment of a Receiver in respect of the suit property.2. The opposite party who is the son of the petitioner, filed a suit, namely. Title Suit No. 32 of 1971 for declaration of title to premises No. 54/1/1, Hazra Road. Calcutta, and for injunction, accounts and other reliefs. In the said suit the opposite party alleged that his grandfather, late Mahendra Nath Banerjee who was the owner of certain properties left a Will by which his two sous, namely. Hrisikesh and Kumud Ranjan, the defendant each got 1/3rd share of the properties in lifetime interest and the remaining 1/3rd share was bequeaihed to th...
Baijnath Agarwal Vs. Ram Kumar Agarwalla and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-06-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Cal286
Sudhamay Basu, J. 1. This is a suit for leave under Order 2, Rule 2; a decree for Rupees 88,362.50 interim and further interest and costs. The plaintiff's case, as a appears from the plaint, is that on or about the 7th of May, 1965 the plaintiff lent and advanced to the defendant No. 1 for the purpose of his business a sum of Rs. 75,000/- at 113A, Monohar-das Chowk, Calcutta, payable 60 days from the date. The defendant No. 1, Ram Kumar Agarwal, on the same day made and drew a Hundi in favour of the plaintiff upon the defendant No. 2 for the said sum payable 60 days from the said date. The defendant No. 2 duly accepted the same. To create a further security for the due payment of the said sum the defendant No. 1 deposited certain title deeds with the plaintiff. On maturity the Hundi was presented to the defendant No, 2 for payment but the same was dishonoured by non-payment to the knowledge of the defendant No. I. The plaintiff claims interest at the rate of 6 per cent, per annum from ...
Mohan Koiri and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-06-1974
Reported in: AIR1974Cal253,78CWN583
Salil Kumar Datta, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment and order of D. Pal, J., discharging the rule obtained by the petitioners. The petitioners' case, in short, is as follows: The petitioners are thika tenants in respect of 3/4th portion of premises No. 121/5, Circular Garden Reach Road in the suburb of Calcutta. They have been residing there since their fore-fathers for over 60 years constructing huts thereon. By a notification dated March 1, 1962, under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, (Act I of 1894), the Government of West Bengal notified that a piece of land comprising premises No. 121/5, Circular Garden Reach Road is likely to be needed for a public purpose, not being a purpose of the Union, namely, for the expansion and development of Kidderpore Academy in Ward No. 85 of the Calcutta Municipality. This notification invited objections to the said acquisition from any person interested in the land within 30 days from the date of publication in the locality. The pet...
In Re: Unique Cardboard Box Mfg. Co. P. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-05-1974
Reported in: [1978]48CompCas599(Cal)
Saul K. Roy Chowdhury, J.1. This is an application for stay of winding up of the company. The facts shortly are that the company was incorporated on December 29, 1953, as a private company and is existing within the meaning of the Companies Act, 1956. The registered office of the company is situate at 12, Gray Street, Calcutta. It appears that the petitioning-creditor obtained an ex parte decree on January 5, 1973, in this court for a sum of Rs. 13,781.25 together with interest and interest on judgment at the rate of 6% per annum and costs as that of a defended suit until it was defended and thereafter as an undefended suit. The petitioning-creditor by a notice dated May 26, 1973, under Section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, through his solicitor demanded the payment of the said decretal amount together with interest and costs thereon as provided in the said decree. The company having failed to pay the said sum of the petitioning-creditor on December 5, 1973, the winding-up petition w...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »