Kolkata Court September 1975 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.
Jyotirmoyee Debi Vs. Durgadas Banerjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-19-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Cal238
ORDERAjay K. Basu, J. 1. This is a suit filed by the plaintiff, Jyotirmoyee Debi, against (1) Dureadas Banerjee, his mother Haripriya Banerjee, since deceased, leaving her the only son Durgadas Banerjee and (2) one Haramohan Banerjee, cousin of the said Durgadas Banerjee.2. According to the plaintiff, the premises No. 35 Amherst Row, Calcutta containing a two-storied building more fully described in the schedule to the plaint, inter alia, containing 1 Cottah 7 Chittaks of land valued at Rs. 25,000/-, belonged to one Beni Madhab Banerjee, since long deceased. After the death of the last owner being Pratima Debi who died in 1947, according to the plaintiff, the plaintiff Jyotirmoyee Debi became the only surviving heir of Pratima Debi and as such, became the owner of the said property, 35 Amherst Row by inheritance.3. The genealogical table as set out in the plaint is as follows :-- BKNI MADHAB BANERJEE (D) ___________________________|_____________________________ | | Monmatha Banerjee Na...
Biswanath Agarwalla and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-19-1975
Reported in: 1976CriLJ1901
Sudhamay Basu, J.1. This Rule relates to an order dated the 22nd of July, 1974 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 3rd Court, Calcutta whereby the learned Magistrate framed charges in case No. G. R. 521 of 1973 under Section 420, I.P.C. and Section 420/109, 'I.P.C. against' the petitioners.2. The prosecution case is that during November, 1970 to February, 1971 the petitioners representing Calcutta Cycle Importing Company of 80-D, Bentinck Street, Calcutta had numerous transactions with T. I. and M. Sales Limited in respect of cycles components and other accessories. In course of the transaction goods were supplied to the petitioners against cheques. The goods were sent from Madras to the Branch office of the T. I. and M. Sales Limited, hereafter referred to as the complainant company. The delivery orders were handed over to the petitioners against cheques with instruction to present the cheque for encashment at a future date. In course of the aforesaid transaction some cheques were ...
SamsuddIn Mia Vs. Munsi Adal Alim and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-17-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Cal52
ORDERR. Bhattacharya, J.1. This revisional application has been filed by the defendant-opposite party against the order of a Subordinate Judge at Birbhum in the Small Cause Court jurisdiction dismissing an application under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by him for setting aside an ex parte decree passed against him.2. The admitted facts relevant for this application may be stated in short. An S. C. C. Suit was filed by the opposite party-plaintiffs Abdul Alim and Sk. Ziauddin against the present petitioner. Samsuddin Mia for realisation of arrears of rent and the defendant appeared to contest and filed written statement challenging the claim of the plaintiffs. On the date fixed for hearing, as the defendant was not present, an ex parte decree was passed to the tune of Rs. 608.88 NP. including costs of the suit. The defendant, thereafter, filed a petition under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil procedure for setting aside the ex parte decree alleging that he ...
Sm. Chand Kaur and ors. Vs. Sm. Nalini Roy Choudhury and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-17-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Cal97
ORDERSalil Kumar Datta, J.1. This Rule was obtained by the defendants against Order No. 114 dated September 24, 1973, whereby their application under Section 17-D of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act was rejected. The facts appear to be as follows :--A suit was instituted by the opposite parties in 1960 for recovery of possession of Premises Nos. 30-A and 51-A, Chakraberia Lane, P. S. Ballygange Calcutta which the defendants Nos. 1 and 2, predecessors-in-interest of the petitioners, held as a monthly tenant. The ground for eviction was default in payment of rent from July 1957 to November 1957. The suit was decreed ex parte on June 5, 1962 and soon after it was restored. Thereafter an application for substitution of the legal representatives of the defendant No. 2 was allowed on September 22, 1962 and they filed an additional written statement adopting the written statement of defendant No. 2 which was accepted. Again the suit was decreed on contest on March 28, 1963 in which Mr. Ma...
Alkali and Chemical Corporation of India Limited Vs. Union of India (U ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-17-1975
Reported in: 1979(4)ELT57(Cal)
ORDERAfter careful study of the marketing organisation and pattern of sale, I hold that the assessable value will be under section 4(b) of C. Ex. and Salt Act, 1944. Listed price without any deduction whatsoever should be the assessable value. Freight and packing charges and service charges of billed by assessee should also be loaded to the assessable value.'5. Thereafter demands were raised on the basis of the said order. It is this order which is Annexure 'D' to the petition which is the subject matter of challenge in this application under Article 226 of the Constitution. 6. The question is, therefore, whether the said order determining the assessable value of the said Chemicals under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 is legal and valid. In order to appreciate this question it would be necessary to refer to certain provisions of the statute. Sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 provides that there shall be levied and collected in such manner as...
Sushil Kumar Ghosh and ors. Vs. Revenue Officer, Balurghat and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-16-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Cal1
Sankak Prasad Mitra, C.J.1. By this judgment we propose to deal with nine appeals. These are First Miscellaneous Appeals Nos. 367 to 375 of 1975. These appeals arise out of Civil Revision Cases Nos. 6927 (W) to 6935 (W) of 1960.2. Two brothers. Srikanta Ghosh and Puma Chandra Ghosh, held extensive lands in West Dinajpore. It is alleged that these two brothers by unregistered deeds executed between January 31, 1953 and February 8, 1953 had transferred certain lands in favour of their sons and daughters individually. It is further alleged that these transfers by unregistered deeds were subsequently confirmed by registered deeds in or about October, 1954. The respondents sought to apply the provisions of Section 5A of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953 to these transfers. Now, in order to attract the said provisions, it is necessary to show that the intermediary transferred lands between the 5th May, 1953 and the date of vesting, that is, the 15th April, 1955. The registered de...
i.T.C. Ltd. Vs. M.R.T.P. Commission and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-16-1975
Reported in: [1976]46CompCas619(Cal)
Amiya Kumar Mookerji, J.1. This rule is directed against a notice dated 18th of May, 1974, under Regulation 7 of the Restrictive Trade Practices (Enquiry) Regulations, 1970, issued by the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission, calling upon the petitioner and the respondent No. 5 to comply with the provisions of Regulations 14 and 16 of the Restrictive Trade Practices (Enquiry) Regulations, 1970, as the Commission has decided to institute an enquiry into the restrictive trade practices in exercise of the powers conferred on it by Section 10(a)(iv) read with Section 37 of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969.2. Petitioner-company (ITC) was incorporated under the Indian Companies Act in the name of Imperial Tobacco Co. of India Ltd. on the 24th August, 1910. It carried on the business of manufacturing and selling cigarettes for domestic and export markets. Respondent No. 5, Vazir Sultan Tobacco Company Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ' VST ') was incor...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hindustan Motors Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-16-1975
Reported in: [1977]107ITR164(Cal)
Deb, J. 1. In this reference, under Section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the question No. 1 relates to the assessment years 1959-60, 1960-61 and 1961-62, whereas question No. 2 relates to the assessment year 1962-63, and they are as follows :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the press division set up by the assessee was an 'industrial undertaking' within the meaning of Section 15C of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and, accordingly, the assessee was entitled to exemption in respect of the profits thereof under the said provision ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the press division set up by the assessee was an 'industrial undertaking' within the meaning of Section 84 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and, accordingly, the assessee was entitled to exemption in respect of the profits thereof under the said provision ?' 2. The assessee is a ma...
Bells Asbestos and Engineering (India) Pvt. Limited (Now Renamed Besto ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-16-1975
Reported in: (1976)ILLJ534Cal
Sabyasachi Mukherji, J. 1. The petitioner-company in this application under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges the order dated the 22nd July, 1971. By the impugned order the workman concerned was given time to file written statement in an application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. It appears that there was some proceedings against the workman and a domestic enquiry was held. The workman concerned was dismissed and as an industrial dispute was pending permission of the Tribunal was sought by making the application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act. From the facts stated in the order of the Tribunal it appears that the workman appeared on the 28th of December, 1970 and prayed for time to file the written-statement. Time was granted to him till the 16th of January, 1971. The workman, however, did not appear on the 16th of January, 1971. To give him opportunity to file written-statement time was again extended to the 3rd of February...
Sukat Ali Biswas Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-15-1975
Reported in: 1976CriLJ28
Bimal Chandra Basak, J.1. In this application for a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus the detenu is challenging an order of detention passed by Sri B. Muhhopadhyay, Secretary, Home Department Government of West Bengal (Special Section) in exercise of power conferred by Sub-section (1) of S. 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, (hereinafter referred to as the taid Act). The said order was passed with a view to preventing the detenu from engaging in transporting smuggled goods. The relevant portion of the grounds of detention served on the detenu reads as follows:You are being detained in pursuance of a detention order made in exercise of power conferred by Sub-section (1) of S. 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), on the ground that you have been engaging in transporting smuggled goods as evidenced by the particulars given below : On 1...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »