Kolkata Court May 1977 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.
R.P. Radio (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-17-1977
Reported in: 1980(6)ELT178(Cal)
ORDERM.N. Roy, J.1. Mr. Banerjee has filed an affidavit-in-opposition for which no leave was taken. In fact, on the last occasion, when the matter was heard in part, he wanted to file the affidavit-in-opposition, which was not allowed. At that time, of course, he submitted that under the Appellate Side Rules, such affidavit may be filed 24 hours before the hearing of the case. He also submitted that although this affidavit was filed on 20th of January, 1976, a copy of the same could not be served on the learned Advocate for the petitioner, as he is not generally available in this Court. Such submissions of Mr. Banerjee, in my view, have got no substance, since on a reference to the petition of motion, it appears that one Mr. Hemanta Kumar Roy Chowdhury, who incidentally is the registered clerk of Mr. P. K. Ghose, Advocate, has identified the petitioner. In that case, it was expected of Mr. Banerjee, to have the affidavit served in due time on the said Sri Hemanta Kumar Roy Chowdhury. H...
Walford Transport Ltd. Vs. State of W. Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-17-1977
Reported in: (1978)IILLJ110Cal
M.N. Roy, J.1. In this rule, an order made by the 5th Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal, respondent No. 2, on a preliminary point being raised by the petitioner-company, against a reference under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (thereinafter referred to as the said Act), has been impeached.2. The petitioner Walford Transport Limited (hereinafter referred to as the said company), is a public limited company within the meaning of the Indian Companies Act and is a dealer and distributor of motor vehicles, having branches in West Bengal and other States. For such business, the said company mainains more than one workshop, one of which is located at 21/1, Darga Road, P.O. Beniapukur, Calcutta (hereinafter referred to as the said workshop). It has been contended by the said company that the said workshop had 2 wings, one for repair of used motor vehicles of outside customers known as paying section, and the other for servicing of scooters, It has been contended by the said ...
Bareilly Electricity Supply and Co. Ltd. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-1977
Reported in: AIR1977Cal426
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. The petitioner is a company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1913. During the year 1968-69 ending on 31st March, 1969 the liability on account of interest on hank overdraft, to the extent of R.s. 60,580.39 was deducted out of the income for that year on the ground that it. was an item of expenditure under sub-paragraph (xi) of paragraph XVII (2) (b) of the Sixth Schedule to the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 and was deductible for working out the clear profit. Such deduction was disputed on behalf of the State of Uttar Pradesh. According to the State of Uttar Pradesh such amount was not deductible. The said dispute was referred to arbitral ion under the provisions of Section 76 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. One of the questions referred, inter alia, was as follows :'Whether the amount of Rs. 60,580.39 being the interest on overdraft is admissible as an item of expenditure during 1968-69 under sub-paragraph XVII (2) (b) (xi) of the Sixth Sch...
Sm. Sima Rani Mohanti Vs. Puspa Rani Pal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-13-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Cal140
M.M. Dutt, J.1. This appeal is directed against Order No. 8 dated Nov. 3, 1973 of the learned Additional District Judge, Second Court, Alipore dismissing the appellant's application for revocation of the probate of the Will, alleged to have been executed by one Binapani Ghose.2. It is the case of the appellant Sima Rani Mohanti that the said Binapani Ghose by a Will dated Sept. 19, 1966 bequeathed her property, which is a half share in premises No. 98A/H/10, Suren Sarkar Road, Beliaghata, Calcutta to the appellant. She filed an application for the grant of probate of the said Will but she could not proceed with the same as she came to know that the respondent No. 1 Basanta Kumar Sen, who was the owner of the other half share of the said premises, had propounded a Will, alleged to have been executed by the said Binapani Ghose on Sept. 18, 1966 and had obtained probate of the same. Thereupon the appellant filed the application for revocation of the grant of probate to the said Will which...
Provash Chandra Chatterjee Vs. Chand Mohan Basak
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-13-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Cal224,81CWN814
Janah, J. 1. This appeal is by the defendant in a suit for ejectment. The suit was instituted by the plaintiff-respondent against the defendant-appellant for the letter's eviction from premises No. 47A Durga Charan Mitra Street, Calcutta consisting of three bed-rooms, one kitchen-cum-store room-cum-dining room and also a privy. The ground of eviction was that the plaintiff reasonably required the suit premises for his own use and occupation and for the use and occupation of the members of his family. It was alleged that the plaintiff purchased the disputed premises by a registered sale deed dated 4th October, 1966 from the daughter and the son of one Satindranath Mitra who was the original owner of the disputed premises. After his purchase a letter was served upon the defendant for attornment of the tenancy in favour of the plaintiff. The defendant attorned the tenancy in favour of the plaintiff, served a combined notice dated 13th June, 1970 under Section 106 of the Transfer of Proper...
Rolls Print and Company (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. B.M. Singh and Son
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-13-1977
Reported in: AIR1977Cal303
R. Bhattacharya, J. 1. This appeal arises out of the decree passed by the City Civil Court, Calcutta in Ejectment Suit No. 1661 of 1965 in favour of the plaintiff B. M. Singh & Son, a firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act having its office at No. 1, Crooked Lane, Calcutta (hereinafter referred to as the firm). The defendant is Rolls Print Co.(P.) Ltd., a limited company under the Companies Act (hereinafter described as the Company). The plaintiff is the owner of the premises No. 1. Crooked Lane, Calcutta of which the suit premises we are concerned with is a part.2. The plaintiff filed several suits against different tenants occupying the premises No. 1, Crooked Lane. Calcutta. With regard to the present suit the plaintiff's allegation is that the defendant was a monthly tenant under the firm in respect of the suit premises at a rental of Rs. 102/- payable according to English Calendar month. The plaintiff, according to the allegation made in the plaint, requires the premises...
N.K. Sengupta Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-12-1977
Reported in: [1978]113ITR413(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J.1. The following questions have been directed to be referred under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, it is perverse to hold that, in estimating the net profit of structural contracts entered into with the Goverment department, the percentage is to be calculated on the gross receipts inclusive of the value of materials supplied by the department themselves ? 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, while holding that in estimating the net profit of the structural contracts the percentage is to be calculated on the gross receipts, it should have been decided also whether the percentage adopted by the authorities concerned need any modification ?' 2. The reference is at the instance of the assessee, N.K. Sengupta, Calcutta. The assessment years involved are 1957-58, 1958-59, 1959-60 and 1962-63. The facts found or admitted as appearing in the statement and the annexures thereto may...
inderlal Agarwalla Vs. M.B. Medhora
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-11-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Cal16
Sankar Prasad Mitra, C.J.1. This is an appeal against the order of Mr. Justice Deb made on the 2nd August, 1971 in Insolvency Case No. 9 of 1970. The petitioner before Mr. Justice Deb, who is the appellant before us, applied for, inter alia, an adjudication order in respect of the estate of the respondent. The learned trial Judge has dismissed the application.2. The facts briefly are that the appellant advanced a sum of Rs. 10,000 to the respondent on the 20th Aug., 1967 for the respondent's business with interest at the rate of 12% per annum until realisation and the respondent executeda promissory note. On the same day the respondent drew a cheque for Rs. 10,000 in favour of the appellant.3. On the 19th Sept., 1967 and the 20th Sept., 1967, the respondent addressed two letters to the appellant requesting the appellant not to present the cheque for payment as he did not have sufficient credit in the bank.4. The appellant's case is that on the 31st July, 1970 the respondent gave the ve...
Shibapada Tripathy and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-06-1977
Reported in: AIR1977Cal322
Salil Kumar Datta, J.1. This is an appeal from the orders dated November 12 and 24, 1976 passed by M. M. Dutt J modifying his earlier order dated August 5, 1976 disposing the Civil Rule No. 18143 (W) of 1975.2. For the establishment of Haldia Dock, lands of residents in Mouza Debhog whereon, it was alleged, their homes and hearths were situated, were acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 by the State of West Bengal(sic) the Board of Trustees for the Port of (sic) cutta (hereinafter referred to as the (sic)cutta Port Trust'). There were negotiations between the State Government and the representatives of the people of Mouza Debhog for rehabilitation of the inhabitants of Mouza Debhog affected by the said acquisition and the Government of West Bengal by its letter of January 8, 1974 communicated its decision to tile Collector of 24-Parganas to allot plots to the affected families of the Mouza Debhog for rehabilitation out of lands adjacent to the town area to be...
Sachindra Nath Seal Vs. Sudam Chandra Pal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-05-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Cal202,81CWN739
M.M. Dutt, J.1. This appeal is at the instance of the defendant and it arises out of a suit for eviction.2. The suit premises comprises three rooms in the ground floor and three rooms in the first floor besides a verandah, privy and water-tap of premises No. 17, Chidam Mudi Lane, Calcutta, which is a three storied building. The said premises belonged to three brothers, namely, Sujit, the plaintiff No. 1 Sudam and the plaintiff No. 2 Salil. The defendant was a monthly tenant under the said three brothers at a monthly rent of Rs. 75. In a partition suit between them the said premises No. 17, Chidam Mudi Lane was partitioned by metes and bounds. The plaintiff No. 1 was allotted lot No. C ,and the plaintiff No. 2 was allotted lot No. B as shown in the plan which formed part of the decree for partition. Lot No. A was allotted to Sujit. Thereafter, a suit for apportionment of rent being Title Suit No. 743 of 1965 was instituted by the co-sharers including the present plaintiffs against the d...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »