Kolkata Court April 1982 Judgments
income-tax Officer and ors. Vs. Burmah Shell Oil Storage and Distribut ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-23-1982
Reported in: [1987]163ITR496(Cal)
R.N. Pyne, J.1. This appeal is directed against, the judgment and order of A.N. Sen J., dated July 3, 1975 (Burma Shell Oil Storage and Distributing Co. of India Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer : [1978]112ITR592(Cal) allowing the respondent's application made under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging two notices issued in connection with initiation of penalty proceedings against the respondent. The facts of this case may be briefly stated.2. The respondent which is a company incorporated under the provisions of the English Companies Acts with liability of its members limited by shares and has its registered office at Burmah House, Piper Sway, Swindon in the United Kingdom, carries on business, inter alia, at Burmah Shell House, Ballard Street, Bombay-1, and also at No. 31, Binoy Badal Dinesh Bag in the town of Calcutta. The respondent's business consists in the importation and of purchase and storage, sale and distribution of petroleum and allied products. The capital of the respond...
Tag this Judgment!Hungerford Investment Trust Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Income-tax Officer, 'F' ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-23-1982
Reported in: [1983]142ITR601(Cal)
R.N. Pyne, J. 1. The subject-matter of this appeal which is directed against a judgment and order of Sabyasachi Mukharji J. dated December 18, 1975 : [1977]106ITR649(Cal) , is a notice dated 25th February, 1975, under Section 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1966-67.2. The appellant No. 1 is a foreign non-resident company and has its registered office at Singapore. It is stated that the appellant did not have any place of business or establishment or connection with India. Up to1955, the appellant held all the shares of M/s. Turner Morrison & Co. Ltd., a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1913. Since1956, the appellant No. 1 has been holding 51% shares in the Indian company. The appellant No. 2, B. N. Garg, was appointed a director of the appellant No. 1 for the purpose of looking after certain pending litigations in India. It appears that on the 6th December, 1974, the ITO, Company Dist. II, Calcutta, wrote a letter to the appellant No. 2 for and on...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. A.K. Chakravarthy Vs. Jagannath Kishore College and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-23-1982
Reported in: (1982)IILLJ427Cal
Bankim Chandra Ray, J.1. The petitioner who is the Principal of Jagannath Kishore College, Purulia, had challenged in this writ petition the order of suspension as well as the charge-sheet contained in the resolution of the meeting of the governing body of the said college held on 31-1-81 as well as the second charge-sheet sent to the petitioner by a letter dated 28-4-81 on the grounds that the said charge-sheets were vitiated by closed mind, bias and the second charge-sheet was contrary to the charge-sheet served early.2. The facts of the case, in short, are as follows :The petitioner was appointed as the Principal of the Jagannath Kishore College, Purulia, which is a Government-sponsored-College against a permanent vacancy on 1st of December, 1978. The term of appointment were that he would remain Principal for one year with effect from the date of his joining the post on probation and confirmation and other conditions of his service would be guided by the West Bengal College Teacher...
Tag this Judgment!A.K. Saha and ors. Vs. Central Bank of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-22-1982
Reported in: (1982)IILLJ177Cal
Manoj Kumar Mukherjee, J.1. This Rule, issued on an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been referred to the Division Bench for disposal under Chapter II, Rule 1 of the Appellate Side Rules, as it appeared to the learned Judge that it involved substantial question of law relating to the interpretation of the Constitution.2. The petitioners in the Rule are the children of either existing or retired employees of Central Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as the Bank,), which is a Banking Company acquired under the provisions of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). On May 6, 1968 the erstwhile management of the Bank issued a circular introducing a recruitment policy in respect of appointment of clerks and other subordinate staff; and prescribed the age and educational qualifications for such appointments. In the case of the children of the employees of the Bank who had put in 15 yea...
Tag this Judgment!Hari Satya Banerjee and ors. Vs. Mahadev Banerjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-21-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Cal76
A.K. Sen, J. 1. This is an appeal from an appellate decree. Defendant no. 1 and defendants Nos. 3 to 10 are the appellants before us. It arises out of a suit for partition on declaration of plaintiffs 2/3rd share in the suit properties. The suit properties were 11 plots of land appertaining to 4 khatians set out in the plaint schedule. Of these 11 plots 3 plots have been excluded from the suit concurrently by the two Courts upon a finding that in respect of these 3 plots, the plaintiff had failed to make out any casefor partition. These 3 plots are Dag Nos. 4882, 4884 of khatian No. 860 and Dag No. 4519 of khatian No. 826. As regards the rest eight plots in suit viz. plots Nos. 4885, 4886, 4941, 4995, 4949, 4950 of khatian No. 860, plot No. 294 of khatian No. 862 and plot No. 4766 of khatian No. 908 while the trial Court decreed the suit declaring 1/3rd share in favour of the plaintiff overruling the plaintiff's claim of acquisition of the other 1/3rd share from defendant No. 2, the Co...
Tag this Judgment!SerajuddIn and Co. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-21-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Cal400,86CWN772
G.N. Ray, J. 1. This writ petition is directed against refusal by the Government of India to accord approval for the renewal of a Mining Lease of the petitioner Company by the Government of Orissa under the provisions of Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 read with the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960. It appears that sometime in the year 1944, the petitioner applied to the then Raja of Keonjhar Estate for grant of a Mining Lease in respect of Manganese Ore over an area of about 3329.40 acres in several mouzas in Champua Sub-Division of the said Estate. On 29th Dec, 1947, the Raja of Keonjhar granted a Mining Lease for the Manganese Ore to the petitioner for a period of to years commencing from 1st Nov. 1946 with an option of renewal for a further term of 15 years. On 8th June, 1949, the Government of Orissa annulled the said Mining Lease. On 14th July, 1949, the Government, however, allowed the petitioner to continue mining operations in the said area on payment o...
Tag this Judgment!Anderson Wright and Co. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-21-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Cal522
ORDERNo. 19/77Calcutta, the 27th May 1977. WHEREAS It is proposed to requisition the premises described in the schedule below for a public purpose under Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the West Bengal Premises Requisition and Control (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1947 (West Bengal Act V of 1947). Now, therefore, in exercise of the power conferred by Clause (b) of Sub-section (3) of the said Act the Governor is pleased to direct that until the expiry of three months from the date of the order Shri Sarat Chandra Roy and Sri Durga Prasad Roy of 101, Sova Bazar St., Calcutta-6, the owners and M/s. Anderson Wright and Co., of 7, Wellesley Place, Calcutta 1, the tenant shall not, without the permission of the State Government, let out the said premises. The Schedule Description of the premises 7, Wellesley Place (3rd floor), Calcutta, Northern portion, measuring approx. 5550 ft. and right of use of other amenities now in occupation of Khardah Co. Ltd. By Order of the GovernorSd/- IllegibleDep...
Tag this Judgment!Corporation of Calcutta Vs. East India Commercial Company Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-21-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Cal479,86CWN926
Anil K. Sen, J.1. These 7 Rules, obtained by the Corporation of Calcutta on as many as 7 revisional applications, raise a fundamental question as to the mode of assessment of annual value under Section 168 of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1951 (hereafter referred to as the said Act) in respect of buildings which are actually let out to tenants on rent agreed but not fixed by the Controller under the Rent Restriction Act. Such a question arose before the learned Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Calcutta, in 7 municipal appeals now pending before him though at an interlocutory stage and the said question having been decided against the Corporation of Calcutta by the learned Chief Judge by an order dt. June 30, 1980, the Corporation of Calcutta has now challenged that order in these revisional applications. Both the parties now before us have waived all objections to our deciding the issue at this stage on a revisional application and have invited as to decide on review of the position i...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Ashis Ranjan Das Vs. Rajendra Nath Mullick
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-20-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Cal529
ORDERDipak Kumar Sen, J. 1. Dr. Ashis Ranjan Das, the plaintiff, instituted this suit on the 24th July, 1981 against Rajendra Nath Mullick the sole defendant, claiming, inter alia, (a) a decree for specific performance of an agreement between the parties for a lease of a portion of premises No. 2 Auckland Place, Calcutta, to be executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff, (b) mandatory injunction directing the defendant to execute and register in favour of the plaintiff a lease in the form set out in Annexure B to the plaint or in such other form as may bs prescribed, (c) in default, the Registrar, Original Side of ihis Court be directed to execute and register such lease in favour of the plaintiff, (d) in the alternative, a decree for Rupees 29,000/- and a further decree for Rupees 1,00,000/- or (e) alternatively, an enquiry into the compensation and a decree for the sum as may be ascertained on such enquiry and other reliefs.2. The plaintiff's cause of action is materially a...
Tag this Judgment!Praga Tools Ltd. Vs. Official Liquidator of Bengal Engineering Co. (P. ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-20-1982
Reported in: [1984]56CompCas214(Cal)
Basu, J. 1. In this application, the applicant Praga Tools Ltd., a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, prays, inter alia, for an order giving leave to execute the decree dated August 1, 1978, against the monies lying with the official liquidator, who is respondent No. 1, arising from the sale of the assets of Bengal Engineering Co. (P) Ltd. (in liquidation) and for a direction to respondent No. 1 to pay the sum of Rs. 50,000 to the applicant in pro tanto satisfaction of the decretal dues of the applicant.2. The facts relating to the making of the present application may be briefly noted.3. On or about July 18, 1969, the applicant filed a suit against the company in liquidation in the court of the Additional Chief Judge at City Civil Court, Secunderabad, being Original Suit No. 64 of 1969. The suit was decreed on July 7, 1972, for a sum of Rs. 90,343.37 with interest at therate of 6% per annum from the date of the suit till the date of realisation and the assessed costs ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »