Kolkata Court December 1981 Judgments
Tide Water Oil Company (India) Ltd. Vs. K.D. Banerjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-15-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Cal127,1982(1)CHN54,86CWN456
B.N. Maitra, J.1. The plaintiff has instituted the suit on the allegation that he is the owner of the property in question. The defendant, Messrs Tide Water Oil Company, was the tenant regarding the premises in question in the front portion of that building under him at a monthly rental of Rs. 650/-payable according to English calendar. Previously, he was posted in Bombay. At that time, one Mr. K.L. Gupta, defendant's officer, was transferred to Cal-cutta. The latter persuaded the plaintiff to let out the front portion of the ground floor of the house including the front lawn, the garden and the garage. He had been assured by Mr. Gupta that the demised portion would be vacated after he was transferred from Calcutta or on his retirement from service, whichever was earlier. That proposal was accepted. The plaintiff has retired from service and has been residing in Calcutta. He and his wife have been suffering from various ailments and it is extremely difficult for them to go upstairs. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Vs. Premier Road Carriers Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-14-1981
Reported in: AIR1983Cal445
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. This appeal arises out of an order and judgment of Mr. Justice Deb. Dt. June 11. 1981, refusing to stay a suit under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. The learned Judge has recorded several points which were urged before him. He, however, did not find it necessary to deal with all those points but rested his decision on two points, viz.. that there were certain allegations in the nature of fraud which should better be tried in a public forum instead of private forum. He has also held that a substantial difficult question of law in the facts and circumstances of the case arises and according to the learned Judge, it should better be tried in a Court of law rather than by arbitration. It appears that the respondent carried certain quantity of lubricating oil under an agreement between the parties, to which we shall presently refer. It was alleged in the petition, which the respondent had denied, that out of this certain quantities of oil were contaminate...
Tag this Judgment!Jay Shankar Jha Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-14-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ744
S.N. Sanyal, J.1. This revisional application is at the instance of the petitioner Jay Sankar Jha against whom a proceeding being Case No. G. H. 572 of 1977 Under Sections 279 and 338 of Penal Code and Sections 89(a)(b) and 118A of the Motor Vehicles Act is pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Third Court. Calcutta. The petitioner was arrested on Sept. 3, 1976 in connection with that case. The petitioner was granted bail by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta on Sept. 4, 1976. The police prayed for time on different dates for completing the investigation and challan was submitted against the petitioner on June 27, 1977. The learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate took cognizance and transferred the case to Metropolitan Magistrate, Third Court. The case was triable as a summons case and the learned Magistrate proceeded with the trial in course of which eight prosecution wit- nesses were examined. The accused thereafter filed an application Under Section 167(...
Tag this Judgment!Haridas Chatterjee Vs. Debendra Nath Basu
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-11-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Cal134
ORDERSudhindra Mohan Guha, J.1. The order dated the 25th May, 1981 passed by the Munsif 5th Court, at Alipore, allowing an application under Section 17 (3) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, has been challenged before this Court. The suit in question being Title Suit No. 295 of 1973 was commenced by the opposite party for ejectment of the petitioner from the suit premises only on the ground of reasonable requirement, The tenancy was said to be held at a rental of Rs. 100/- per month according to English Calendar Month. The petitioner defendant after appearance deposited rent under Section 17 (1) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, since December, 1975 and made an application under Section 70 (2A) (b) of the Act for liquidating the admitted arrears since August, 1973 upon which on a joint petition by the parties, the learned Munsif by an order dated 30-11-76 directed to liquidate the arrears by 29 months. The petitioner also filed an application for fixation of fair rent in t...
Tag this Judgment!Calcutta State Transport Corporation Vs. Jagadinra Nath Banerjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-11-1981
Reported in: (1983)IILLJ106Cal
P.K. Banerjee, J.1. This appeal at the instance of the Calcutta State Transport Corporation being a body corporate constituted under the Road Transport Corporation Act 1950 arises out of a suit filed by the plaintiff who was a foreman Grade I under the services of the appellant. His case was that on 27.11.66 while the plaintiff was returning home in a departmental vehicle he suffered severe injury as a result of collision with another vehicle. The plaintiff was taken to R.G. Kar Hospital. Thereafter he was taken to his residence. The plaintiff had to take leave. He was medically treated by the Doctor of the defendant as well as by the private Doctor. The plaintiff was granted Rs. 500/- as ex-gratia by the defendant. The plaintiff got leave from 28.12.66 to 14.5.67. He resumed the duties on 15.5.67 and worked upto 22.5.67 but took leave again for three months on the Medical Officer's advice. He applied on 26.5.67 for retirement on medical ground but nothing was heard by him from the app...
Tag this Judgment!Asit Kumar Dey Vs. Bishudhananda Chaudhury and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-08-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Cal55,86CWN238
ORDERSudhindra Mohan Guha, J.1. The petitioner tenant has challenged the order dated 11-8-1981 whereby Sri T. K. Paladhi, Munsif, 3rd Court, Burdwan rejected the application under Section 17 (4) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act.2. The petitioner, a practising physician was a tenant since the time of the predecessor of the opposite parties in respect of suit premises, used as chamber and Medicine shop at Memary, Dist. Burdwan at a rental of Rs. 40/- per month according to Bengali calendar. A suit for ejectment being Title Suit No. 206 of 1976 in the 3rd Court of Munsif was filed against him on ground of default in payment of rent for the month of Chaitra 1382 B. S. and Baisakh 1333 B. S.3. On receipt of notice to quit on 4th June, 1976 the petitioner remitted the rent for those two months on 5th June. 1976 which was however refused. On June 18, 1976 the petitioner deposited the sum of Rs. 120.50 P. as rent for Chaitra 1382 B. S. and Baisakh and Jaistha, 1383 B. S. with the Bent C...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer Vs. C.L. Sadani Family Trust
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-07-1981
Reported in: (1982)1ITD223(Kol.)
1. The assessee is a trust. The trust was created by indenture dated 13-3-1975 by Shri N.D. Sadani. The settlor appointed two trustees, viz., his wife Smt. Sohan Devi Sadani and his son Shri C.L. Sadani.Clause 3 of the trust deed declared : The Trustees shall hold and stand possessed of the Trust Fund and of any additions or accretions thereto upon the following trusts :- (a) The Trustees shall, subject to the provisions of Sub-clauses (b), (c) and (d) hereof, from time to time and for a period of 21 years from the date hereof invest and accumulate all and every part of the income out of the Trust Fund by investing the same and the resulting income thereof in or upon any investment hereby authorised which shall thereupon become part of and subject to the Trusts affecting the Trust Fund, (b) During the period aforesaid, but subject to the provisions of Sub-clauses (c) and (d) hereof, the Trustees shall set apart in every year an amount equal to 5 per cent of the Income of the Trust Fun...
Tag this Judgment!Sarda Debi Vs. Pacific Garments
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-07-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Cal241
ORDERDipak Kumar Sen, J. 1. Sarda Debi, the plaintiff, instituted this suit against Pacific Garments the defendant, on or about the 29th of June, 1981, claiming, inter alia, a decree for Rs. 52,937.50 P. interest and costs. 2. The plaintiff's cause of action as appearing from the plaint is, inter alia, that the plaintiff lent and advanced to the defendants, a sum of Rs. 50,000 by a cheque dated the 8th April 1980 solely for the purpose of the business of the defendant. It was agreed that the defendant would repay the said sum with interest at the rate of 15% per annum. 3. On or about the 2nd Jan., 1981, the defendant made over to the plaintiff a cheque for Rs. 50,000 on Canara Bank towards repayment of the said loan. The said cheque was dishonoured by nonpayment. 4. The present application of the plaintiff is on a summons dt. the 24th Aug., 1981 returnable on the 1st Sept., 1981 the plaintiff prays that a final judgment be passed against the defendant for the amount claimed in the suit...
Tag this Judgment!Basudeo Mondal and ors. Vs. Dud Kr. Pramanick and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-07-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ1654
ORDERAmitabha Dutta, J.1. The Criminal Revision No. 1038 of 1970 is directed against the order dated 12-2-79 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate. 6th Court, Alipore issuing summonses under Section 379 I.P.C. against the petitioners Nos. 3 to 7 in Complaint Case No. 63 of 1975 and Criminal Revision No. 1039 of 1979 is directed against an order of the same date passed by him issuing process under Section 379 I.P.C, against the petitioners Nos. 2 to 4 in Com-paint Case No. 65 of 1975.2. Complaint Case No. 63/75 has originated from a complaint filed by the opposite party Dud Kumar Pramanick (in Criminal Revision No. 1038 of 1979) alleging that on 4-1-75 and 5-1-75 the petitioners and others forcibly trespassed into the disputed land and reaped and removed the paddy grown there by the opposite party. The learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate examined the complainant and directed an investigation into the complaint by the local J.L.R.O. apparently under Section 202 of the Cr. P.C....
Tag this Judgment!D.R. Punjab Montogomery Transport Co. and anr. Vs. Raghuvanshi Pvt. Lt ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-03-1981
Reported in: AIR1983Cal343,(1982)2CompLJ74(Cal),86CWN759
Chittatosh Mookerjee, J.1. In the year 3959, D. R. Punjab Montgomery Transport Co. was inducted as a tenant under Raghuvanshi Pvt. Ltd. at a monthly rent of Rs. 1152/- in respect of five rooms situated in the ground floor of 17, Kashinath Mallick Lane, P. S. Jorasanko, Calcutta. According to the plaintiff-appellants, at the relevant lime Sardar Mohindar Singh (since deceased) and his mother were partners of the said firm D. R. Punjab Montgomery Transport Co. Raghuvanshi Pvt. Ltd., the defendant respondent No. 1, had instituted suit No. 1526 of 1964 against the said firm, D. R. Punjab Montogomery Transport Co., in the High Court at Calcutta for eviction on the ground of default in payment of rent. The said suit was decreed on compromise under which, inter alia, the monthly rent was raised to Rs. 1210/- per month and the said tenant was required to pay the arrears in instalments. In 1967 the then landlord had brought another ejectment suit being Suit No. 1293 of 1967 against the firm, D....
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »