Kolkata Court June 1978 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.
Shew Karan Agarwalla and anr. Vs. SatyanaraIn Mansinka
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-09-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Cal495,82CWN1008
Salil Kumar Datta, J.1. These two appeals have been heard before me, one after the other, and practically common questions of law and fact are involved in these appeals. They will be governed by this judgment.2. The same plaintiff in both the connected suits is the landlord of the respective defendants in respect of two shop rooms, with a godown room in addition in respect of one tenancy of Mundhra Brothers, of the house with C. I. roof, wooden walls, pucca floor situated in Holding No. 6, Ward XVIII of the Siliguri Municipality. The tenanted premises had been held by the defendants as monthly tenants according to English Calendar month. According to the plaintiff, the premises were very old and in dilapidated condition and 'therefore the premises are reasonably required by him for purpose of building and rebuilding.' The tenancies were duly determined by notice containing also the threat of suit. As the defendants failed to vacate, two suits were instituted in 1966 against the tenants...
Gobind Pritamdas Malkani Vs. Amarendra Nath Sircar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-09-1978
Reported in: [1980]50CompCas219(Cal)
Padma Khastgir, J.1. A company formerly known as N. C. R. Corporation and since April, 1974, known as M/s. National Cash Registers Co. with limited liability incorporated in the U.S.A., having its registered office at U.S.A., carried on business in India, inter alia, at 4/D, B. B. D. Bag, East Calcutta, within the jurisdiction of this court, at Madras, New Delhi, Bombay and Ahmedabad. The said company hereinafter referred to as 'the American company' was carrying on the business of import and marketing in India of various accounting and other machines. The plaintiff, Gobind Pritamdas Malkani, Amarendra Nath Sircar, Keshab Ranjan Chakraborty, Bhabatosh Dey and many others were employed by the said American company. The plaintiff, Govind Pritamdas Malkani, was the manager of the Bombay branch.2. By an agreement in writing dated 16th of February, 1974, executed between the American company and the defendants Nos. 1, 2 and 3, the American company agreed to sell and transfer to the defendan...
Banwaridas Pugalia Vs. Colgate Palmolive Co. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-08-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Cal133
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. This is an appeal under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 from a decision by the learned Deputy Registrar. By the said decision the learned Deputy Registrar has refused the application of the appellant for grant of a trade mark. It appears that the appellant filed an application to register in Part A of the register a trade mark consisting of the word 'FORMIS' in Class 3 in respect of 'Cosmetics'. The application was in due course advertised before acceptance under the proviso to Section 20(1) of the Act in the appropriate journal. On 7th June, 1973, Colgate Palmolive Company of U. S. A. filed a notice of opposition to the registration. The said application thereafter came up for hearing before the learned Deputy Registrar. It was contended before the learned Deputy Registrar that the mark in respect of which the appellant was seeking registration was not adapted to distinguish within the meaning of Section 9 of the Act on the ground that the trade ma...
Bombay Gas Company Ltd. Vs. Hindustan Mercantile Bank Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-08-1978
Reported in: [1980]50CompCas202(Cal)
Salil K. Roy Chowdhury, J. 1. This is a winding up petition presented by a contributory on the 26th of September, 1977, for the winding up of the company on the ground that the substratum of the company has gone, the company has ceased to carry on business for more than a year, and is not in a position to carry on any new business and it is just and equitable to wind up the company.2. The undisputed facts are that the company was incorporated on the 5th of February, 1944, as a banking company as its name suggests and is governed by the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. The objects of the company as set out in the memorandum is verbatim reproduction of the objects which are provided in the various sub-clauses of Section 6(1) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. The petitioner alleged that it holds about 22% of the subscribed capital of the company. It appears that the company, by a resolution passed on the 28th of November, 1973, approved a draft agreement regarding the proposed transfer of...
Amco Furnace Contractors Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-08-1978
Reported in: [1979]116ITR868(Cal)
Sen, J. 1. The facts found and/or admitted in these proceedings are as follows: Amco Furnace Contractors Ltd., the assessee, is a non-resident. By an agreement dated the 16th March, 1964, entered into by and between the assessee and Hindusthan Steel Ltd., the assessee, inter alia, undertook to design, supply, erect and commission at a site in Durgapur, West Bengal, a forge shop and sheet mill furnaces and to supply spare parts for the same. Pursuant thereto the assessee started the work in 1964, but before the same could be completed the contract was terminated in 1967. On the 7th November, 1968, a settlement was arrived at by and between the assessee and the Hindusthan Steel Ltd. whereunder the assessee received the following amounts for works done up to the date of the termination of the contract: Accounting yearAmount Rs.19648,66,170196511,53,731196633,72,950196733,05,860 86,98,7112. The assessee was assessed to income-tax in the assessment years 1965-66 to 1968-69, the relevant acc...
Crompton Greaves Ltd. Vs. Hindustan Steel Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-06-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Cal444,82CWN996
M.M. Dutt, J.1. This Rule is at the instance of the petitioner Crompton Greaves Limited and it is directed against order No. 23 dated Sept. 22, 1977 of the learned Subordinate Judge, Burdwan. By the said order, the learned Subordinate Judge allowed the application of the opposite party Hindustan Steel Limited under Section 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940.2. It appears that on Dec. 23, 1965 the petitioner and the opposite party entered into a contract for the erection of the power distribution system and putting them into commission on the 'turn-key' basis to be executed by the petitioner, the contractor. After the 'turn-key' job was completed and the power distribution equipment was put into commission, the petitioner found some surplus cables lying in its custody which were not incorporated in the said 'turn-key', job. The petitioner claimed that the said surplus cables belonged to it while the opposite party claimed title and ownership to the same. So a dispute arose between the part...
N. Sciandra Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-06-1978
Reported in: [1979]118ITR675(Cal)
Sen, J.1. The facts found and/or admitted in these proceedings are shortly as follows :The Fertilizer Corporation of India, a Government of India undertaking incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation'), embarked on a project designated Durgapur Fertilizer Project, where it was decided to erect an ammonia plant in Durgapur, West Bengal. With that object the Corporation entered into agreements in writing with two Italian technical concerns, namely, Montecatini Edition S.P.A., Milano (Italy) and Ansaldo S.P.A., Genova (Italy) (hereinafter referred to as 'Ansaldo'), inter alia, for obtaining technical know-how and guidance and for supply of various technical equipments, machinery and instruments as also services of technical personnel. In the agreement by and between the Corporation and Ansaldo dated the 31st August, 1966, it was, inter alia, stipulated as follows : '3.20.....Ansaldo would make available at the plant site competent technicians ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Swadeshi Mining and Manufacturing Co. L ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-06-1978
Reported in: [1979]118ITR975(Cal)
Sen, J. 1. In this reference, on an application of the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal-III, Calcutta, under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961, this court directed the Tribunal to draw up a statement of case and refer the following questions for the opinion of this court as questions of law arising from its order : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and on a proper interpretation of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and the amendments to the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1955, on the 23rd September, 1958, and the letters dated the 28th December, 1964, and 11th April, 1967, of the Government of India, the Tribunal erred in holding that liability for payment of Rs. 52,556.80 as additional price for sugarcane accrued during the previous year ended on 30th September, 1960, and was allowable as deduction for the assessment year 1961-62. 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in law in holding that the payment o...
Birendra Nath Dhar Vs. Food Corporation of India
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-05-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Cal362
ORDERMonjula Bose, J. 1. The present application is by the plaintiff in this suit who seeks to vary or modify a report of the Special Referee dated October 11, 1977 made herein by enhancing the amount of damages as determined by the Learned Referee. 2. The facts leading to this application are shortly as follows:-- The plaintiff was appointed the Handling and Transport Contractors for loading, unloading and transport of foodgrains at the defendant's two specified godowns for a period of two years from March 7, 1969 to March 6, 1971. Under the terms contained in the tender, no definite volume of work was guaranteed but the defendant undertook to pay to the Contractor during the subsistence of the contract a minimum amount per month the quantum of which was not specified. The defendant also had a right to terminate the contract at any time without assigning any reason therefor on 30 days' notice to the Contractor without being liable to pay any compensation to the plaintiff for such term...
Karamchand Thapar and Brothers (Coal Sales) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of I ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-05-1978
Reported in: [1983]140ITR939(Cal)
Banerji, J. 1. In this reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, relating to the assessment year 1955-56, for which the accounting year ended on 31st March, 1955, the Tribunal has referred the following question : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the sum of Rs. 43,288, being the amount of under-charges out of the unclaimed credit balances written off duringthe previous year was liable to be included in the assessee's total income for the assessment year 1955-56 ?'2. The facts found and/or admitted are shortly as follows. 3. In the assessment year in question, the assessee claimed that a sum of Rs. 49,217 representing unclaimed credit balance written off during the year should not be treated as revenue receipt. Rs. 43,288 out of the said unclaimed credit balance represented under-charges in respect of the freight for the under-loaded wagons, which the customers of the assessee had to pay under the Railw...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »