Kolkata Court June 1976 Judgments
Bijoli Prova Nandy Chowdhury Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-25-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Cal64
Banerjee, J.1. This appeal arose out of an application for reference under Section 18 at the instance of the claimant. By notification dated 17th April, 1965, 336.27 dec. of land was acquired out of which the appellant is interested in C. S. Plots Nos. 4091, 4092 and 4095 and the Collector toy his award dated 3rd September, 1968 allowed Rs. 39,263.85 p. The nature of the land in which we are interested in this application are Bill, Bhery and Bhery machchas. The Collector valued the bill and bhery lands at the rate of Rs. 1210/- per acre. Not being satisfied with the award given toy the learned Collector, the appellant referring claimant made an application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act and claimed compensation at the rate of Rupees 2500/- per cottah for the acquisition of the petitioner's property. She also claimed Rs. 2500/- per month for the period of requisition. The learned arbitrator however allowed at the rate of Rs. 80/- per cottah or Rs. 1616/- per bigha and he f...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Gift-tax Vs. Tarachand Meghraj
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-24-1976
Reported in: [1977]109ITR775(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 26(1) of the Gift-tax Act, 1958. The assessment year involved is 1958-59. The applicant in this reference is Commissioner of Gift-tax, West Bengal III, Calcutta. The question referred is as follows :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was a valid gift on March 28, 1957, of the two sums of Rs. 1,00,000 and Rs. 50, 000 in favour of Bai Kamala and Bai Indu ?'2. The facts which are found or admitted as appearing in the statement of the case and the annexures thereto are briefly as follows :The assessee, M/s. Tara Chand Meghraj of Calcutta, is a Hindu undivided family governed by the Mitakshara. At the material time one Surajmall Baid was the karta of the said Hindu undivided family. On the 28th March, 1957, a document recording a family arrangement was executed by themembers of the said Hindu undivided family, viz., the karta, Surajmall Baid, his wife, Hira Kumari Baid, and his unmarried daughters, Kama...
Tag this Judgment!Bimal Kumar Chandra and ors. Vs. the State and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-23-1976
Reported in: 1976CriLJ1864
P.K. Chanda, J. 1. The Rule, in Criminal Revision No. 531 of 1975 has been issued at the instance of four petitioners, namely, Bimal, Swapan, Shyamal and Nimai to show cause why the order No. 1 dated 8-5-75 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Alipore, fifth court in sessions trial No. 3 of May, 1975 and order dated February 10, 1975 by the learned Magistrate, Alipore, in G. R. Case No. 3155 of 1971 should not be set aside.2. Apart from the controversy raised in this reviskmal application another revisional application has been filed by Biswanath Mondal alias Bishu and that has given rise to Criminal Revision No. 908 of 1975 against the self-same orders. Additional ground taken in this application is that the learned Additional Sessions Judge acted illegally in appointing a lawyer of his own choice for the petitioner's defence at the State expenses. Both the revisional applications were filed after the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 came into operation.3. By the order dated 10-2-75...
Tag this Judgment!Asoke Chakraborty Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-23-1976
Reported in: 1977CriLJ157
H.N. Sen, J.1. The petitioner has, in this Rule, impugned the order dated 27-4-1974 passed by Shri S.K. Das, Metropolitan Magistrate 12th Court, Calcutta in G.R. Case No. 760 of 1973 and has prayed for quashing the proceeding and alternatively for transferring the case to the Court of Sessions Judge, Howrah for trial.2. The petitioner was arrested on 22-10-72 over an incident said to have taken place on 14-10-72 at about 8 p.m. on a ferry boat near Palghat and Belur-gtoat on the river Hooghly within the jurisdiction of Bally Police Station. Over the said incident North Port Police Station recorded a case being Case No. 98, dated 15-10-72 under Section 395/397, I.P.C. and on completion of investigation, submitted a challan under Section 395/397, I.P.C. on 13-8-73 before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta. The case was ultimately transferred to the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate, 12th Court for disposal. By his order dated 27-4-74. the learned Magistrate committed the petit...
Tag this Judgment!State of West Bengal and anr. Vs. Ajit Kumar Mukherjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-22-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Cal273,81CWN36
M.N. Roy, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated March 6. 1963 bv the learned Subordinate Judge, 6th Court, Alipore, made in Money Suit No. 13 of 1958, The plaintiff respondent (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) at all material times and still is carrying on business under the name and style of Pearson Trading Company at 1/5, Raja Basanta Roy Road, Calcutta-26, as a contractor in food in the Police departments in West Bengal and several other mercantile concerns, pursuant to an invitation of a tender for the supply of die-tory articles, including cow and Bhaisa ghee by the Superintendent of Police, 24 Parganas, he on November 5, 1948 submitted a tender for such articles of cow and Bhaisa ghee at the following rates :(1) Buffalow ghee ... @ Rs. 235/-(2) Cows ghee ... @ Rs. 295/- (No. 1) Guarantee % per cent.(3) Cows ghee ... @ Rs.220/- per maund (No. 2)Such tender of the plaintiff was accepted by the said Superintendent of Police by his letter of Nove...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Bani Roy Chowdhury Vs. Competent Authority, Inspecting Assistant ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-18-1976
Reported in: [1978]112ITR111(Cal)
Ramendra Mohan Datta, J.1. The subject-matter of this writ petition relates to a notice dated the 18th June, 1973, published in the Official Gazette under Section 269D(1) of the Income-tax Act, whereby proceedings were sought to be initiated by way of acquisition of the property of the petitioner being a premises in Block B in New Alipore in Calcutta. The said notice reads as follows :' FORM INTS------------------------NOTICE UNDER SECTION 269D(1) OF THEINCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (43 of 1961)SEAL OF THE Ref. No. Ac-8/R-II/Cal/73-74Office of theInspecting Asst. Government of IndiaCommissioner of Office of the......Income-tax, Acquisition Dated 18-6-73Range-II, Calcutta. 2. Whereas, I, M. N. Tiwary, being the competent authority under Section 269B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), have reason to believe that the immovable property, having a fair market value exceeding Rs. 25,000 and bearing No. 29/NA (E.P. & W.P.) situated at Block ' B', New Alipur (and more fully described in the Sche...
Tag this Judgment!J.K. Steel and Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-18-1976
Reported in: [1978]112ITR285(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J.1. In this reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the question before the court is :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the entire payment of selling agency commission was not an allowable deduction in computing the income from business but only a portion thereof was allowable for the assessment years1960-61 and 1961-62 under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ?'2. The reference is at the instance of M/s. J. K. Steel & Industries Ltd., Calcutta, the assessee. The assessment years involved are 1960-61 and1961-62, the relevant previous years ending on the 30th June, 1959, and 30th June, 1960, respectively.3. The facts found or admitted are that the assessee is a public limited company and carries on the business of manufacture of jute bailing, hoops, steel wire ropes and box strapping. The assessee was incorporated on the 13th October, 1953, and by a resolution dated the 13th Novemb...
Tag this Judgment!Saraswati Debi and ors. Vs. Satya Narayan Gupta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-16-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Cal99,80CWN753
R. Bhattacharya, J. 1. This is an appeal under the Letters Patent against the judgment and the decree passed by one of our learned brothers, A. K. Sinha, J. in a first appeal reversing the judgment and the decree passed by the Judge, 8th Bench of the City Civil Court at Calcutta in Money Suit No. 81 of I960. The defendants are the appellants here. In the trial court the suit was dismissed, but in the first appeal the suit was decreed after the setting aside of the decision of the trial court. 2. The relevant facts for this appeal may be stated in brief. One Jhawalal Gupta, a Hindu governed by the Benaras School of Hindu Law was the owner of several properties. He died leaving a widow and four sons. They constituted a joint undivided family. Thereafter Satya Narayan Gupta for self and representing his minor sons filed a suit in the High Court for partition in respect of the properties left by Jhawalal. There were prayers for partition of the properties and also for accounts. A prelimina...
Tag this Judgment!Satyanarayan Saraf Vs. Assistant Controller, a-ward
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-16-1976
Reported in: 80CWN813,[1978]111ITR432(Cal)
M.M. Dutt, J.1. This rule involves the construction of Section 34(1)(c) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'.2. One Hanuman Prasad Saraf, who was governed by the Mitakshara school of Hindu law and was the karta of the Hindu undivided family, died on January 21, 1961. He was survived by the following members of his family : HANUMAN PRASAD SARAF (deceased) | Durga Debi (widow) _______________________________________________________________ | | | Satyanarayan Saraf Gyan Bai Sushila Bai | (daughter) (daughter) Narbada Debi(wife) __________|___________________________ | | Bhagawati Prasad (Son) Sudha (daughter)3. The petitioner, Satyanarayan Saraf, who is the son of Hanuman Prasad, is the accountable person in respect of the estate of the deceased within the meaning of the Act. The respondent No. 1, Assistant Controller, 'A' Ward, Estate Duty-cum-Income-tax Circle, by his order dated August 31, 1964, assessed the principal value of the estate of the deceased, ...
Tag this Judgment!Ayesha Khatoon Vs. Durga Sahaya
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-14-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Cal108
A.P. Bhattacharya, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs whose suit for ejectment of a monthly tenant on the ground of forfeiture of the lease for nonpayment of rent was dismissed by the trial Court. The appeal is contested by the defendant. The defendant's prayer for relief against forfeiture under Section 114 of the Transfer of Property Act was allowed by the Court below and on compliance thereof the suit was dismissed. Mr. Ganguly arguing the appeal before us has submitted that the conduct of the defendant appellant has been such that the relief against forfeiture should not have been allowed to him as he had contested the suit and is also contesting the appeal with equal vigour.2. Mr. Ganguly at the time of argument submitted that the lease had expired on 31st May 1976 and he made an application for amendment of the plaint by introducing an additional ground for eviction namely a ground which is now available to the plaintiffs appellants after the lease has expired by efflux of ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »