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.
Maya Chandra and ors. Vs. the Inspector, Minimum Wages Office and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-05-1978
Reported in: 1979CriLJ534
ORDERJyotirmoyee Nag, J.1. This Rule is directed against the issue of summons by the learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hooghly, under Section 22-A of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 against the petitioners. Upon a complaint being filed by the Inspector under the Minimum Wages Act, the present prosecution has been started against the petitioners. There are five Petitioners before me of whom petitioner No. 3 is dead. Three of them are partners of M/s. Rupali Cinema situated at Netaji Subhas Road, Chinsurah, Hooghly. The fourth petitioner is described as the General Manager and the fifth petitioner is Manager of the Cinema House. The Inspector under the Minimum Wages Act visited the establishment of the Cinema Industry of which the present petitioners are the partners and General Manager and Cinema Manager respectively on the 4th of April, 1977. He noticed certain contraventions of the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and he served notices on the petitioners on 23-4-77 who ...
Nritya Gopal Nandi Vs. Gour Mohan Adak
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-02-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Cal364
ORDERSalil Kumar Datta, J. 1. This Rule is directed against an Order No. 43 dated November 19, 1976 rejecting plaintiff's petition for reconsideration of the earlier order of the same Court being No. 38, dated July 16, 1976. It appears that in the connected appeal the appellate Court directed that the petition for amendment of the plaint filed in the appellate court would be considered by the trial Court provided the plaintiff paid a sum of Rs. 25/- as costs to the defendant within a fortnight of the arrival of record to that Court and in default, the appeal was to stand dismissed which would mean the dismissal of the suit itself as ordered by the trial Court.2. It appears from Order No. 26, dated October 3, 1975 that records were received back by the trial court on that date along with copy of judgment of the appellate court. The trial Court passed an order on that date directing the parties to take steps by November 15, 1975. It may be mentioned here that the Court closed for long va...
Jeewanlal (1929) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-02-1978
Reported in: [1978]115ITR465(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. The subject-matter of challenge in this application under Article 226 of the Constitution is a notice dated 4th January, 1974, issued under Section 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1969-70. It appears that the original assessment was completed some time in February, 1972. Prior to the completion of the original assessment, the assessee had written on 15th November, 1971, a letter in which the assessee had stated that in respect of premises at Sarat Bose Road, a suit against the tenant for vacating the premises in question had been filed and, as such, no rent had been accepted by the assessee since November, 1967. The assessee wrote this letter for the reason that no income was shown under the head ' Income from property ' in the return of the income for the assessment year 1969-70, though for the assessment year 1968-69 a part of it had been shown. According to the assessee, in the particulars of income with the statement annexed for the rele...
Satish Chandra Maity Vs. Sm. Saila Bala Dassi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-02-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Cal499,82CWN991
R. Bhattacharya, J.1. This second appeal is by the defendant No. 3 of the original suit which was decreed in favour of the plaintiffs and affirmed in the first appeal.The case of the plaintiffs is that the disputed land originally belonged to one Ramanibala Dassi who made a gift of the same in favour of Gosta Behari Mondal, the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiffs by a deed dated 9-11-1925 and Gos-tha Behari Mondal since then started possessing the same in his own right. In C.S. khatian the property was recorded in the name of Gostha and his brother Krishna. In fact Krishna had no interest therein. As Gostha was in possession of the property and nothing stood in the way of enjoying the property as his own, no step was taken for correction of the record of rights. In the R. S. khatian also the name of Gostha and Gokul Chandra Mondal, the son of Krishna since deceased was recorded and the said record is erroneous and without any foundation. The defendant No. 1 cannot have any title ...
Bali Ram Dhote Vs. Bhupendra Nath Banerjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-01-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Cal559
ORDERPadma Khastgir, J. 1. By an agreement dated 29th of June 1966 the plaintiff herein Baliram Dhote agreed to purchase and Bhupendra Nath Banerjee, Jitendra Nath Banerjee, Abanindra Nath Banerjee and Nihar Bala Devi agreed to sell the premises No. 8/1, Hazra Road. The salient. terms and conditions of the said agreement are set out as hereunder : --1. The Vendors agree to sell and the purchaser agrees to purchase all that the said premises No. 8/1, Hazra Road, Calcutta, fully and particularly mentioned and described in the Schedule hereunder written (hereinafter referred to as the said premises) for an absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance in fee simple in possession or an estate equivalent thereto free from all encumbrances whatsoever at or for the sum of Rupees 2,80,000/- (Rupees Two lacs Eighty Thousand) only subject to the vendor's making out a good and marketable title thereto. 2. The purchaser has this day paid to the vendors a sum of Rs. 10,001/- (Rupees Ten thousand ...
Graphite India Ltd. and anr. Vs. Dalpat Rai Mehta and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-01-1978
Reported in: [1978]48CompCas683(Cal),82CWN903
P.C. Borooah, J. 1. On November 3, 1977, the opposite party No. 1, Dalpat Rai Mehta, filed a petition of complaint in the court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta, against the petitioner and others alleging commission of an offence under Section 293A of the Companies Act, 1956. It was stated, inter alia, in the complaint that the said opposite party was a shareholder of Graphite India Ltd. and on perusal of the annual report and accounts of the company for the year 1976, he came across an item of expenditure of Rs. 1,52,000 stated to have been incurred for advertisements in the All India Congress Committee Souvenirs. It was further alleged that the aforesaid expenditure paid to a political party in any manner is a contribution to a political party for a political purpose in contravention and in violation of the provisions of Section 293A of the Companies Act. 2. The learned Magistrate after perusing the petition of complaint and examining the complainant took cognizance and...
Hind Development Corporation Vs. Income-tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-01-1978
Reported in: [1979]118ITR873(Cal)
M.M. Dutt, J.1. This rule is at the instance of the assessee and it is directed against the order dated March 26, 1973, of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Calcutta.2. The questions which are involved in this rule, are whether the appeal preferred by the CIT against the order of the AAC was barred by limitation and, if so, whether the Tribunal was justified in condoning the delay in preferring the appeal. It may be stated here that by that appeal the Commissioner challenged the order of the AAC allowing the exemption of a salami receipt of Rs. 74,868 under Section 10(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961.3. The order of the AAC was passed on March 1, 1972. Under Section 253(3) of the IT. Act, 1961, every appeal under Sub-section (1) or Sub-section (2) shall be filed within 60 days of the date on which the order sought to be appealed against is communicated to the assessee or to the Commissioner, as the case may be. Section 250(7) provides that on the disposal of the appeal, the AAC sha...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›