Kolkata Court May 1979 Judgments
Ramanand Agarwalla Vs. Richardson Hooghly Holding Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-07-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Cal335,83CWN683
ORDER1. This is an application for substitution. The applicants are the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased sole appellant Ramanand Agarwalla who died during the pendency of the appeal. They have prayed for their substitution in the appeal in place of the deceased sole appellant. The application has been filed within time and the same is in form. The application has been opposed by the respondent No. 1. It is necessary to state certain facts for the purpose of appreciating the contentions made by the respondent No. 1 in opposing the prayer of the applicants for their substitution in place of the deceased sole appellant.2. The said Ramanand Agarwalla entered into a contract with the respondent No. 1, a foreign company, for the purchase of 7942 ordinary shares of Rs. 100/-each which the respondent No. 1 held in the respondent No. 2, Hooghly Ink Company Limited which is an existing company within the meaning of the Companies Act, 1956. The contract of sale was subject to the a...
Tag this Judgment!Upendranath Pal Vs. Sasthi Pal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-03-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Cal218,83CWN662
M.M. Dutt, J.1. This appeal is at the instance of the defendant and it arises out of a suit for ejectment.2. The plaintiff instituted the suit on the ground that the defendant was a defaulter in payment of rent since Magh 1376 B.S. The defendant entered appearance in the suit and filed an application under Section 17 (2A) (b) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 praying for an enquiry into the allegations of default and permitting the defendant to pay by instalments the arrears of rent, if any. The said application came up for hearing before the learned Judge on Aug. 10, 1973. The defendant admitted that he was in arrears of rent for Magh and Falgun 1376 B.S. It was, however, submitted on behalf of the plaintiff that the question of technical default might be left open and decided at the time of hearing of the suit, and that the application of the defendant might be disposed by directing him to deposit the arrears of rent for the said two months with statutory interest. The le...
Tag this Judgment!Harchand Vs. Additional Collector of Customs and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-03-1979
Reported in: 1981(8)ELT699(Cal)
M.N. Roy, J.1. This Rule was obtained on September 24, 1973, against certain orders made upto revision under the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) in respect of two consignments as mentioned hereinafter, meant for export out of India.2. The petitioner, Harchand, has stated to have carried on business, at all material times, under the name and style of Harchand Jawharmal. He has claimed to be the sole proprietor of the firm as mentioned above and has also stated to have carried on such business at premises No. 65, Chittaranjan Avenue, Calcutta. In the Rule, the orders made after revision, in respect of two sets of cases have been impeached. The first case relates to nine consignments under nine shipping bills and the second one relates to four consignments under four shipping bills. So far as the first case is concerned, the relevant orders would be Order No. 21 dated February 18, 1967, as passed by the Additional Collector of Customs, Calcutta; Order No. 492 o...
Tag this Judgment!Gobinda Lal Dey Vs. Paran Kumar Raha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-02-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Cal215,83CWN657
M.M. Dutt, J.1. This appeal is at the instance of the defendant in a suit for ejectment.2. The defendant was a lessee under the plaintiff and his co-sharers in respect of the suit premises consisting of two rooms in the ground floor of premises No. 25/1/A, Raj Chanlra Sen Lane, Calcutta at a monthly rent of Rs. 50/- subsequently enhanced to Rs. 60/-, under a registered deed of lease dated April 1, 1956 for a term of 16 years. Before the expiry of the lease, there was a partition of the joint properties of the plaintiff and his co-sharers by a registered deed of partition dated December 16, 1970. By virtue of the said partition, the plaintiff was allotted the said premises no. 25/1/A, Raj Chandra Sen Lane, Calcutta including the suit premises. On September 27, 1972, the plaintiff instituted a suit for ejectment against the defendant, being Title Suit No. 1098 of 1972 of the City Civil Court, Calcutta, praying for the eviction of the defendant from the suit premises on the ground of expi...
Tag this Judgment!Ayesha Khatoon and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-02-1979
Reported in: 1979(1)CHN426,83CWN776,[1980]126ITR489(Cal)
Dutt, J. 1. This appeal is at the instance of the defendants and it arises out of a suit for declarations. 2. The case of the plaintiff. Union of India, represented by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) Calcutta, Assam, Manipore and Tripura, was that one Md, Safulla, the sole proprietor of M/s. Habibulla Safulla of Tinsukia, was an assessee under the I.T. Act His income-tax was assessed by the ITO, Dibrugarh, for the sum of Rs. 1,27,926-11-0 which became due and payable by him. A certificate proceeding was started for the recovery of the said sum. The Certificate Officer, Dibrugarh, could realise only Rs. 3,180 on July 12, 1949, by attachment and sale of some movable property of the assessee and the balance sum of Rs. 1,24,746-11-0 remained due and payable by the assessee. A certificate proceeding was also started in the court of the Certificate Officer, Alipore, on November 9, 1949, In the said proceeding, the Commissioner of Wakfs, West Bengal, filed a claim on the allegation t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›