Kolkata Court March 1977 Judgments
Gobinda Chandra Bhowmick Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-30-1977
Reported in: AIR1977Cal371
Sankar Prasad Mitra, C.J. 1. This Bench has been constituted pursuant to a reference under Chap. VII of the Appellate Side Rules by a Division Bench consisting of Mr. Justice P. K. Chanda and Mr. Justice Sudhamay Basu.2. The question referred to us is as follows :--'For the purpose of determining whether a person is a child or not within the meaning of Section 28 of the West Bengal Children Act, 1959, is the age to be determined with reference to the date of the commission of the offence or when the person is brought before the Court or with reference to some other date ?'3. In Criminal Appeal No. 470 of 1'974, (Madan Pradhan v. The State) reported in 1976 (1) Cal LJ 224 Mr. Justice P. C. Barooah sitting with Mr. Justice H. N. Sen has held that if a person be a child 'on the date of the commission of the offence for which he was convicted' his trial along with an adult is 'clearly without jurisdiction being in contravention ofthe specific provision of Section 28(1) of the Act'.4. The o...
Tag this Judgment!Pramode Kumar Mittal Vs. Sri Bhuramal Chiranjilal Mittal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-24-1977
Reported in: AIR1977Cal340,82CWN574
ORDERSabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. This is an application under Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act, 1940 for directing the arbitrator to file the interim award made and published by him on the 6th January, 1977, in this Court.2. In order to appreciate the controversy in this case, it is necessary to briefly refer to certain facts. Pramode Kumar Mittal, the petitioner herein, and the respondents all belong to the same family, hereinafter referred to as Mittal family. They are all descendants of the first respondent Bhuramal Chiranjilal Mittal. It is not necessary to refer to the actual relationship between the parties. There are several companies and firms which belong to the different parties to which also it is not necessary to refer in detail. The family was also interested in several trusts. Diverse disputes and/or differences arose in the Mittal family relating to and concerning the business of the said firms, trusts and companies and regarding the control and management thereof and ...
Tag this Judgment!Bareilly Electricity Supply Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-22-1977
Reported in: AIR1977Cal328
ORDERSabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. This is an application by Bareilly Electricity Supply Co. Ltd., filed on the 18th January, 1977, challenging the award dated the 28th September, 1974.2. Before I go to the merits of the rival contentions of the parties it has to be mentioned that a preliminary objection was taken as to the maintainability of this application. It was contended that on the 19th January, 1977, the name of the petitioner Company was changed into Bareilly Holdings Limited. Therefore, the petitioner, it was urged, was not entitled to continue the present proceeding in this form and name. As would appear from what is stated above, when the application was made it was a competent application because the change in the name had not taken place at that time. The change took place subsequently.Therefore, in view of the provisions of Section 23(3) of the Companies Act, 1956 and the facts and circumstances of this case, in my opinion, it would be proper to allow the prayer, on the oral...
Tag this Judgment!Pran Kumar Dey Vs. Paritosh Sanyal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-22-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Cal466
R. Bhattacharya, J. 1. This Second Miscellaneous Appeal is by the judgment-debtor in a Title Execution Case No. 38 of 1966 before the First Court of Munsif at Krishnanagar against the order of dismissal of the first miscellaneous appeal passed by the Subordinate Judge at Nadia arising out of an order of the learned Munsif of the executing court refusing to stay the execution proceedings on the prayer of the judgment-debtor. The relevant facts may be stated in brief. A decree was obtained against the judgment-debtor and the title execution case was started for execution of the said decree for recovery of possession. The judgment-debtor, it appears, filed a suit for declaration that the decree obtained by the decree-holder-respondents was a nullity. Before that in connection with the decree the defendant went up to the High Court in second appeal, but was unsuccessful. The defendant got sufficient time to vacate the premises in favour of the plaintiffs. The learned Munsif of the executin...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Tulsidas Bhimji and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-22-1977
Reported in: [1977]109ITR557(Cal)
Salil Kumar Datta, J. 1. This rule is directed against an order of the Commissioner, Presidency Division, dated December 29, 1971, whereby the order of the Tax Recovery Officer, Calcutta and 24-Parganas, dated August 28, 1971, was set aside with certain directions. 2. The facts as stated in the petition in short are as follows : Bhimji Nathubhai was at the material time assessed in the jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer, 'C' Ward, Dist. IV(3), Calcutta. The assessee was a partner of the firm, Nathubhai Odhavji & Co. and New Bihar Biri Leaves Co., Calcutta. On August 21, 1965, Bhimji Nathubhai died leaving his widow, Bai Muktaben Bhimji, and his sons as his heirs and legal representatives. Bai Muktaben Bhimji as the legal heir of the deceased made a voluntary disclosure on January 29, 1966, declaring the income of the deceased at Rs. 3,09,500. The said disclosure was accepted by the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal III, and the acceptance was communicated to the Income-tax Of...
Tag this Judgment!Murarka Paints and Varnish Works Ltd. and anr. Vs. Income-tax Officer ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-21-1977
Reported in: [1978]114ITR480(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. The subject-matter of challenge in this application under Article 226 of the Constitution is a notice dated 7th January, 1976. The said notice was issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act; 1961 for reopening the assessment for the assessment year 1972-73. The petitioner No. 1 is a limited company. The petitioner No. 1's assessment was completed for the relevant assessment years in accordance with law. The petitioners state that they have complied with all the requirements of the Income-tax Officer for the completion of the assessment of the petitioner No. 1. The petitioner No. 1 showed in his return for the relevant assessment year a loan of Rs. 1,10,000 alleged to have been received from one Manickchand Mohanlal. The petitioner No. 1 produced the confirmation slip of the alleged lender as well as the income-tax file number of the said alleged lender. By the impugned notice the said assessment has been sought to be reopened. The petitioners contend that ...
Tag this Judgment!The State of West Bengal Vs. Dhanesh Bijoy Sahana and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-18-1977
Reported in: AIR1977Cal457
Banerjee, J. 1. These two appeals at the instance of the State of West Bengal arise out of a land acquisition reference. By notification dated 20th February, 1958, part of C. S. plot No. 244 of Khatian No. 212, Mouza Kenduadihi, was sought to be acquired. F. A. 921 of 1964 is in respect of garden, area being 2-70 acres and F. A. No. 922 of 1964 is in respect of Bastu and Tara land being 1.41 and Order 42 acres respectively. In making the reference to the Court under Section 18 of the Act, the Land Acquisition Collector stated that the valuation has been assessed on the basis of the sale figures of land sold in the Mouza and those have been obtained from the Registration Department and as per provision of the Land Acquisition Act. It is stated that the land was valued at Rs. 8.500/- per acre. The referring claimant not being satisfied filed an application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act for reference. It must be stated that the lands were acquired under the relevant provisi...
Tag this Judgment!Indian City Properties Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-18-1977
Reported in: [1978]111ITR19(Cal)
Sankar Prasad Mitra, C.J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee is a limited company. The assessment year is 1963-64. The relevant accounting year is the calendar year 1962.2. The assessee owns lands and buildings and derives income by way of rent from house properties, dealings in land, as well as income from other sources including dividend.3. The house properties were at Bombay, Delhi and Calcutta. One of the points of dispute is, whether the income derived from letting out of the buildings is to be computed under Section 22 or 28 or 56 of the Income-tax Act, 1961., i.e., whether it should be taxed as income from house property or income from business or income from other sources. The Income-tax Officer has taxed the income as income from house property under Section 22.4. In the Income-tax Officer's assessment order we find three items, viz., (1) Gross rental; (2) Lift charges received ; and (3) Air-conditioning charges received. The t...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Padma Rani Ghosal Vs. Panchkari Ghosal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-17-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Cal104
B.C. Ray, J. 1. This appeal at the instance of the plaintiff No. 2 is against the judgment and decree dated May 13, 1963 passed in Title Appeal No. 994 of 1963 by Additional District Judge, 7th Court, Alipore modifying the judgment and decree dated June 27, 1962 passed by Subordinate Judge, 7th Court, Alipore in Title Suit No. 66 of 1957 and it arises out of a suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession of the suit land or in the alternative for cancellation of the kobala standing in the name of the defendant. 2. The salient facts of the case are that the plaintiff's father Mahadeb Banerjee and the plaintiff No. 1 Durga Charan Banerji, brother of the plaintiff No. 2, arranged the marriage of plaintiff No. 2 with the defendant's son Prodyote Kumar Ghosal. On the demand of the defendant the plaintiff's father had to give a sum of Rs. 4,000 as dowry to the defendant who gave thirty Bharis of gold ornaments to plaintiff No. 2 prepared out of the said money. The plaintiff's fat...
Tag this Judgment!Jiwnani Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-17-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Cal228
ORDERSabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. This is an application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. Jiwnani-Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd., the plaintiff herein carried on and still carries on business as Railway Contractor and Engineer having its office at 75/C, Vivekananda Road, Calcutta. Pursuant to an invitation to tender by the defendant, the South Eastern Railway, the plaintiff duly submitted a tender for execution of earth work in formation, bridge works, buildings and other miscellaneous works in connection with the doubling of the railway tracks from Hijli to Balasore on the east coast of the South Eastern Railway. It is the case of the plaintiff that the plaintiff duly executed all the works under the agreement. Disputes arose and the same were referred to arbitration. The disputes referred contained as it appears from Annexure-A to the petition claims, inter alia, as follows : '3. Earthwork in embankment. Final bill prepared by XEN as per actual cross-section vide pages 2115 t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »