Kolkata Court August 1979 Judgments

Ranjit Kumar Pandey Vs. Sm. Swaha Rani Pandey

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 1979CriLJ1301

ORDERMonoj Kumar Mukherjee, J.1. Against an order dated September 9, 1977 passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Basirhat in a proceeding under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 40 per month towards the maintenance of the wife opposite party and a further sum of Rs. 80 per month towards the maintenance of their daughter, the petitioner filed a re-visional application and by his order dated January 5, 1978 the Additional Sessions Judge, 12th Court, Alipore rejected the said application and upheld the order of the learned Magistrate. The petitioner thereafter filed an application for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act and the same was registered as Matrimonial Suit No. 825 of 1977. The suit was transferred to the Third Court of the Additional District Judge, Alipore and was renumbered as Matrimonial Suit No. 19 of 1978. The suit was decreed ex parte on February 1, 197...

Amal Kumar Mukherjee and anr. Vs. Clarian Advertising Service Ltd. and ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: [1982]52CompCas315(Cal)

Salil Kumar Roy Chowdhury, J.1. This is an interlocutory application in a main petition tinder Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956, presented on the 27th of July, 1979. Ad interim orders were issued in the interim application appointing a special officer to take possession and make an inventory and initial the statutory books and documents of the respondent-company and certain other interim orders. The respondents were given liberty to apply for vacating, modifying and altering the orders if so advised and the petitioners were given liberty to apply for further interim orders on the returnable date. On the returnable date being the 31st of July, 1979, the respondents appeared through Mr. R.C. Deb, Mr. B.K. Bachawat, Mr. H.K. Mitter, Mr. Sujit Sinha and Mr. Ranjan Deb, for the opposing group, and Mr. Sankar Ghosh, appearing with Mr. P.C. Sen and Mr. Jayanta Mitter, for a group of respondents who alleged themselves to be neutral. But according to the opposing group they are r...

Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) Vs. Assam Oil Co. Ltd.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: [1983]139ITR688(Cal)

Deb, J.1. Two questions are involved in this reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, and they are as follows :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the order of the Commissioner passed under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the 7th September, 1967, was barred by limitation 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the said order of the Commissioner was also wrong and illegal and could not be upheld ?' 2. The assessee is a company. The reference relates to the assessment year 1947-48. At the time of completing the original assessment no double I.T. relief was allowed on account of income which had suffered tax both in India and in other countries. Subsequently, by an order dated January 31, 1950, double I.T. relief was given for income doubly assessed both in Ceylon and in India. On August 6, 1951, double I.T. relief was given in the U.K....

P.C. Mahindar Vs. Chairman, Calcutta Port Trust and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Dipak Kumar Sen, J.1. Parthul Chand Mahindar, the petitioner herein had been employed as a Harbour Master (River) in the Port of Calcutta till the 24th March, 1973 when he retired on superannuation. At the material time, the Port of Calcutta was managed and was under control of the Commissioners for the Port of Calcutta, a local authority incorporated under the Calcutta Port Act, 1908. The Calcutta Port Act, 1908 was replaced by the Major Port Trusts Act, 1968 which was made applicable to the Port of Calcutta in 1974. Under the Act of 1963 the persons in the management of the Port of Calcutta are the trustees.2. Under cover of a letter, dated the 27th July, 1976 a charge sheet contained in a memorandum, also dated the 23rd July, 1976 was served on the petitioner, stating that it was proposed to initiate disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner and the petitioner was charged-with having committed gross misconduct during the year 1972-73 while functioning as a Harbour Master (River...

Smt. Drupadi Rani Mahati Vs. Purna Ch. Mahapatra

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1980Cal158

ORDERJyotirmoyee Nag, J.1. This Rule is directed against an order dated 7-11-78 passed by the learned Munsif, 2nd Court, Midnapore in J. Misc. Case No. 32 of 1975 refusing the prayer of the petitioner for amendment of the plaint.2. The petitioner had filed an application under Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act for pre-empting the transferred lands appertaining to kha-tian Nos. 14 and 46 of mouza Janageriya within Narayangarh Police Station and the said proceeding was registered as J. Misc. Case No. 32 of 1975. The petitioner had purchased some lands appertaining to khatian No. 14, the shares of opposite parties Nos. 10 and 11 by registered sale deed dated 9-6-69 and therebybecame co-sharer of khatian No. 46 and by purchase from Chittaranjan Maity and Basanta Maity by a sale deed dated 13-11-68 became adjoining land owners and as such became entitled to pre-empt the disputed lands. The petitioner filed an application praying for amendment of the pre-emption petition by addin...

Mahesh Kumar Agarwalla Vs. Smt. Saraswati Dey

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1979Cal322

ORDERG.N. Ray, J.1. This Rule is directed against order No. 5 dated March 1, 1978, passed by the learned Munsif, 1st Court at Sealdah in Title Suit No. 128 of 1978. By the impugned order, the learned Munsif rejected the application made under Section 17 (2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act by the defendant petitioner on the groundthat the said application was not maintainable as the admitted arrears of rent for April, 1977, July, August and September, 1977 at the rate of Rs. 50/-per month had not been deposited along with the said application made under Section 17 (2) of the Act. It appears that the said Title Suit way instituted by the plaintiff opposite party Smt. Saraswati Dey against the tenant petitioner for eviction of the tenant petitioner from the suit premises on the ground of default of payment of rent by the said tenant. It appears that within the prescribed period of limitation, an application under Section 17 (2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act was made by t...

Gobindlal Bangur Vs. Wealth-tax Officer and anr.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (1980)14CTR(Cal)172,[1980]123ITR216(Cal)

Dipak Kumar Sen, J.1. Gobindlal Bangur has moved this application as the karta of a HUF known and styled as Narain Das Govindlal Bangur, alleging, inter alia, as follows :On the 29th September, 1969, the petitioner, as such karta, filed a return of wealth-tax for the assessment year 1969-70, the relevant valuation date whereof being 31st March, 1969. A net wealth of Rs. 7,21,248 was disclosed in the return, consisted, inter alia, of shares in joint stock companies both quoted and unquoted and in the return the value of the quoted shares was shown as quoted in the official market quotation list of a recognized stock exchange on the said valuation date. A revised return was filed on the 17th April, 1970, showing revaluation of immovable properties of the said family and claiming exemption in respect of jewellery under Section 5(i)(viii) of the W.T. Act. The WTO completed the assessment under Section 16(c) of the W.T. Act on the 25th March, 1971, after due consideration of the returns fil...