Kolkata Court February 1980 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.
Ram Khilan Das Vs. Sm. Radharani Dasi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-06-1980
Reported in: AIR1980Cal131
Sudhindra Mohan Guha, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff whose suit for a declaration that the decree passed in Ejectment Suit No. 79 of 1958 between Radharani Dasi v. Augurbala Dasi was not binding upon the plaintiff nor executable against him and for permanent injunction, was dismissed by the learned Court below.2. The case of the plaintiff was as follows :--The father of the plaintiff Late Chanchal Das was originally a tenant in respect of a shop room in the ground floor of premises No. 107A, Durga Charan Mitra Street, under the original owner Mohanlal Dey at a rental of Rs. 20/- per month and on his death in the year 1956 the plaintiff, who was only son inherited the tenancy of the shop room and had been carrying out coal business therein. The rent of the room was gradually increased up to Rs. 30/- per month with electric charges of Rs. 3/- per month. But in the year 1360 B. S. the entire suit premises with all the existing tenancies were leased out by Mohanlal Dey to defendan...
Sm. Ashalata Dey and ors. Vs. Kamal Kumar Bose
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-06-1980
Reported in: AIR1980Cal271,(1981)1CompLJ235(Cal)
ORDER1. This is an application for amendment of the plaint filed in these two Letters Patent Appeals which arise out of a suit for eviction. The application has been heard on contest by the tenant-defendant who is appellant in one of these appeals and respondent in the other.2. On Apr. 30, 1965 the plaintiffs instituted the aforesaid suit seeking a decree for eviction on several grounds including the ground that they reasonably required the suit premises for their own occupation. At the time the suit was instituted Section 13 (1) (f) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act 1950 in its material part provided:'(f) where the premises are reasonably required by the landlord..... .for his own occupation if he is the owner or for' the occupation of any person for whose benefit the premises are held,'In the plaint the plaintiffs then pleaded their requirement accordingly.3. The suit was decreed on May 20, 1967 by the trial Court on twofold grounds, viz. that the plaintiffs reasonably require ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bengal Potteries Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-05-1980
Reported in: [1980]126ITR442(Cal)
Deb, J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, andthe questions are as follows :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper construction of the agreement dated 31st December, 1960, the Tribunal was right in holding that the impugned payment of Rs. 53,000 was an item of revenue expenditure deductible in computing the assessee's income from business ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper construction of the agreement dated 31st December, 1960, the Tribunal was right in holding that the payment to M/s. RIG by way of royalty (Rs. 62,600) and the expenditure incurred by the assessee for payment of remuneration and travelling expenses for the German technicians were items of revenue expenditure deductible in computing the assessee's income from business ' 2. The statement of the case relates to the assessment year 1962-63, the relevant previous year being the calendar year 1961.3. The asse...
Gopi Nath Kund Vs. Bank of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-05-1980
Reported in: (1980)IILLJ332Cal
ORDERChittatosh Mookerjee, J.1. The petitioner at the relevant time was employed as a clerk/cashier of the Bank of India, Bhubaneswar Branch. The Executive Regional Manager, Eastern Region, Bank of India by a memorandum dated 3rd January, 1976, inter alia, stated that it had been reported against him that on 25th November, 1975 within the bank hours he had indulged in shouting and abusing the Area Manager and an officer of the Bank; of India and the officers in general in fifthly, indecent and vulgar language, The Executive Regional Manager called upon the petitioner to explain within 7 days of the receipt of the said memorandum why disciplinary action should not be taken against him. The Executive Regional Manager, Eastern Region by the same order suspended the petitioner with immediate effect from the services of the Bank pending enquiry into the petitioner's aforesaid acts. The petitioner was to receive subsistence allowances according to the rules. On 21st January, 1976 the petitio...
General Industries Vs. Bank of Rajasthan and Rajasthan State Mines and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-01-1980
Reported in: [1981]51CompCas405(Cal),84CWN884
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. This is an application by the Rajasthan State Mines & Minerals Ltd. defendant No. 2 in this suit, asking that the plaint in the above suit should be rejected and/or be taken off the file and further that the said suit be stayed. In order to appreciate the contentions raised in this case, it would be relevant to refer to certain facts.2. On 6th April, 1976, the petitioner, i.e., the said defendant No. 2 in this suit, published in the Statesman a tender notice inviting tenders for the transport of gypsum from the gypsum deposit of respondent No. 2 at Mahila Mines in Sri Ganganagar to Hanumangarh Town Railway sidings on the Northern Railway, both in the State of Rajasthan. On 20th April, 1976, respondent No. 1, i.e., the plaintiff in this case, in response to the said tender notice, submitted a tender at Bikaner in the State of Rajasthan along with a deposit of earnest money of Rs. 20,000 as stipulated in the said notice.3. After prolonged discussions between th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›