Kolkata Court January 1977 Judgments
Kamal Kumar Bose Vs. Sm. Ashalata Dey and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-31-1977
Reported in: AIR1977Cal197
S.K. Datta, J. 1. This is an application by the plaintiffs landlords respondents for a direction on the tenant appellant to deposit all arrears of damages in respect of the suit premises. The plaintiffs respondents, the petitioners in this application obtained on May 20, 1967 a decree before the trial Court for recovery of possession of the suit premises on eviction of the defendant therefrom. The said decree was modified on appeal in this Court by the learned Judge on June 26, 1973 by a decree for partial eviction. The learned Judge, it is alleged, on concession by the tenant appellant decreed the suit in respect of the ground-floor and first-floor of the premises leaving the defendant to remain in possession of the other portion of the premises and the monthly rent was apportioned from Rs. 85/- to Rs. 40/- in respect of the premises allowed to be retained by the tenant The tenant defendant however was dissatisfied with the judgment and preferred the instant appeal. It has also been s...
Tag this Judgment!Jnanendra Nath Pramanick Vs. the District Magistrate, Nadia and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Cal324,81CWN986
M.N. Roy, J.1. The petitioner, an elected Commissioner of Santipur Municipality (hereinafter referred to as the said Municipality), has challenged a notice in Annexure 'A,' issued by the District Magistrate, Nadia in exercise of the powers under Sub-section (4) of Section 61 of the Bengal Municipal Act, 1932 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act).2. At the time material to the Rule, Shri Pratap Chandra Saha (Respondent No. 5) was the Chairman of the said Municipality. A notice dated October 9. 1976 was signed by 16 out of the 18 Commissioners of the said Municipality and was served on the District Magistrate, Nadia (Respondent No. 1), informing her thereby that they have no confidence in the Chairman of the said Municipality and requesting the said respondent No. 1 to convene a special meeting of the Commissioners under Section 61 of the said Act for the purpose of moving the following resolution:^^lkrhiwjh ikSj'kHkkj egk?;{kx.k ikSj&lHkkifr; Jh izrkipanz lgkj izfr vukLFkk xkkiu djh...
Tag this Judgment!Sudhangsu Kumar Mukherjee and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Cal130
A.N. Banerjee, J.1. This appeal is directed against the award made by the Arbitrator on a reference made to him for determination of compensation for demolished building and structures on C. S. Plots Nos. 643 and 719 of Mauja Plata, P. S. Noappara, Dist. 24 Parganas. It appears that disputed properties were requisitioned by the State Government for public purpose, being purpose of Union of India under Rule 75-A of the Defence of India Rules. The said requisition was subject to the provisions of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Ordinance 1952, subsequently repealed and replaced by the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 (Act XXX of 1952). The requisition was made on 23-1-1943 and possession was taken on the same day. Monthly rent of Rs. 75/- was being paid to the claimants up to 15-4-1957. On 25-5-1957, an amount of Rupees 25,460/- was offered by the Collector, 24 Parganas to the claimants as replacement costs of the demolished building...
Tag this Judgment!Surajmull Choteylal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-1977
Reported in: [1978]114ITR130(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukhakji, J. 1. This is an application for review and reconsideration of an order passed by this court on 27th of June, 1974. The said order was passed in Income-tax Reference No. 265 of 1967. It appeals that in respect of the assessment year 1958-59, there was a reference to this court under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, on the following two questions :'(a) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the loss of Rs. 54,934 suffered by the assessee in its transactions in hessian and gunny bags, which were concluded by transfer of P.D.Os. is loss arising from speculative transactions under Explanation 2 to Section 24(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ? (b) If the question No. 1 is answered in the affirmative, whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the loss of Rs. 54,934 could be set off against the profit from other business activities of the assessee under Section 10(1) notwithstanding the provisions contained in t...
Tag this Judgment!Jay Krishna Saha and anr. Vs. D.N. Lal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-20-1977
Reported in: AIR1977Cal468,81CWN539
ORDERT.K. Basu, J.1. In this application, the petitioner challenges certain proceedings sought to be initiated by a notice under the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The facts leading to the present application may be briefly noted.2. On the 11th July, 1973, a search was made at the premises of Joy Krishna Saha and Charu Bala Saha who are related to each other as man and wife. In course of the search 226 pieces of gold sovereigns and a sum of Rs. 90,000 were seized. Statements were also recorded from both the petitioners. The statements of both the petitioners were almost identical. The gold sovereigns, according to them, were given to Charu Bala Saha by the father of her husband Joy Krishna Saha. The father of the husband died in the year 1956. They could not definitely say when this gift was made by the late father of the petitioner No. 1. Certain statements were made with regard to the cash but we are not concerned with that in the present application.3...
Tag this Judgment!Bengal Assam Steamship Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-20-1977
Reported in: [1978]114ITR327(Cal)
Deb, J. 1. The following questions are involved in this reference under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the period of limitation under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, should be computed from the order of the Income-tax Officer under Section 49A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, dated, February 22, 1961, and not from his order dated September 4, 1963, under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of which rectification of mistake was applied for and in dismissing the appeal on that ground ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the period of limitation under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, should be computed from the order of the Income-tax Officer under Section 49A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, dated March 30, 1961, and not from his order dated Septem...
Tag this Judgment!The Remembrancer of Legal Affairs Vs. Kedar Nath Maity and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-19-1977
Reported in: 1978CriLJ440
Anil K. Sen, J.1. This is a revisional application preferred by the State. In this application the State challenges the validity of an order dated July 8,1975, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Midnapore in Keshiary P, S. Case No. 3 dated 4th Jan. 1975, whereby the learned Magistrate discharged the accused persons who were being prosecuted Under Section 13 of the Rice Milling Industries (Regulation) Act, 1958. The learned Magistrate has discharged the accused persons solely on the ground that cognizance was not validly taken as it was so taken on a re port which was not lawfully lodged by the competent authority in due compliance with the requirement of Section 15 of the Act,2. Section 15 provides :- 'No Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under this Act except on a report in writing of the facts constituting such offence made by the Licensing Officer or any person duly authorised by the Central Government or the Licensing Officer in this behalf'. Facts- are no...
Tag this Judgment!Debi Prosad Singha Roy Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-18-1977
Reported in: AIR1977Cal117
ORDER1. In this application, the petitioner, who is an elected member of the Kankuria Anchal Panchayat (hereinafter referred to as the said Panchayat), has impeached an order dated December 31. 1976 (Annexure B), whereby in terms of a notification issued under Section 67 of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), the said Panchayat has been superseded for a period of one year from January 3, 1977. The said order was made on the basis of and under an order dated December 21, 1976 (Annexure 'A'), which the petitioner has also challenged.2. Admittedly the petitioner is not the elected Prodhan of the said Panchayat and he has contended that because of abscondence of the erstwhile Prodhan of the said Panchayat and two other members, the same has suffered much and in fact such sufferings continued till the election of one Shri Pasupati Tah, Respondent No. 7 as Prodhan on the basis of a meeting convened in March 1972 with the prior approval and sanction ...
Tag this Judgment!Mahasukrai Ramrichpal Vs. Kishori Charan Law
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-18-1977
Reported in: AIR1977Cal122,81CWN376
N.C. Mukherji, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 12th Court at Alipore in Title Appeal No. 1038 of 1970 dated 30th April 1971 affirming those of the learned Subordinate Judge, 6th Court at Alipore in Title Suit No. 67 of 1963 passed on 19th June 1970. The facts of the case may briefly be stated as follows :--The respondent filed a suit for ejectment and mesne profits against the defendant, who was a monthly tenant at a rent of Rs. 400/- payable according to the English calendar month. According to the terms of the tenancy, the defendant was not to make any addition or alteration to the premises without the consent of the plaintiff in writing. The plaintiff was informed that the defendant has constructed a pucca temple and two sheds with pucca walls etc. with C. I. roof on the suit premises. These structures are of permanent nature and have been illegally made without the knowledge and consent of the plaintiff. Thus t...
Tag this Judgment!Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs Vs. Prafulla Majhi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-18-1977
Reported in: 1977CriLJ853
Anil Kumar Sen, J.1. A point of some importance as to maintainability of certain appeals presented by the State under Section 378(1), of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (hereinafter referred to as the new Code) having arisen for consideration at the earliest stage of granting the necessary leave under Section 378(3) of the said Code, we have heard it as a preliminary issue in the above appeal. Such a point has arisen in this particular case under the following circumstances.2. The two respondents were tried on a charge under Section 302/109, I.P.C. by the learned Sessions Judge, Purulia, in Sessions Trial No. 24 of 1976 and were acquitted. The State felt aggrieved by the said order of acquittal and has preferred the above appeal. The appeal has been filed by the Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs (hereinafter referred to as the L. R) on behalf of the State. The petition of appeal has been signed by one Shri Dilip Mitra, who, we are told, is the Special Legal Remembr...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »