Kolkata Court June 1982 Judgments
Sukhamoy Roy Vs. Salilananda Basak and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-16-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Cal83,86CWN1025
Sen, J.1. This is an appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent by the tenant-defendant (hereinafter referred to as defendant) and it arises out of a suit for eviction which has been concurrently decreed by the three Courts below. The only point which has been raised before us is with regard to the maintainability of the suit.2. It is not in dispute that the plaintiffs respondents (hereinafter referred to as plaintiffs) acquired the premises of which the suit premises is a part by purchase from one Profullamoyee Dasi. The defendant who was a tenant in existence in a part of the premises so purchased became a tenant on attornment under the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs brought Title Suit No. 31 of 1957 for eviction of the defendant on the ground of default in payment of rent since May, 1954. In this suit the plaintiffs claimed the monthly rent payable by the defendant to be Rs. 20/-. The defendant appeared to contest but his defence having been struck off under Section 17 (3) of the West...
Tag this Judgment!Patel Roadways Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Bata India Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-16-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Cal575,86CWN992
Anil K. Sen, J.1. In this revisional application, which is being heard as a contested one, a short point arises for our consideration as to whether a stipulation in a contract for carriage of goods to the effect that Bombay court alone would have jurisdiction in respect of claims with regard to goods entrusted for carriage would oust the iurisdiction. of the Alipore Court to entertain a suit for damages for non-delivery of such goods at the instance of an assignee of a consignment note, though such court has otherwise iurisdiction to entertain the suit.2. According to the plaintiff/opposite party certain textile goods valued at Rs. 29,842.91 were delivered to the de-fondant company, a common carrier at their Pondicherry Office for carriage to Balanagar against 3 consignment notes. The defendant having failed to deliver the goods so entrusted to them, the plaintiff as the assignee of the consignment notes instituted Money Suit No. 20 of 1976. In the plaint, the claim was laid on 3 alter...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Kashinath Mondal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-15-1982
Reported in: 1982CriLJ2069
ORDERJyotirmoyee Nag, J.1. This application is directed against an order passed by the learned Executive Magistrate, Alipore, under Section 145 of the Criminal P.C. On 30-1-1981 the learned Executive Magistrate passed the following order : Perused the P.R. which corroborates the contention of the P. P. that he was dispossessed from his rented room on 30-6-1980 by the O. P. As such I convert this case under Section 144 Cr. P.C. to a case Under Section 145 Cr. P.C. and draw up proceedings under Section 145 Cr. P.C. directing both the P. P. and the O. Ps. to submit their respective written statement in respect of the disputed room to this court on 1-4-1981. Issue notice accordingly. The notice was issued to both the parties as follows:Whereas it has been made to appear to me and I am satisfied from report submitted by the Bhowanipore P.S. as also from petition filed by the 1st party that a dispute likely to cause a serious breach of the peace exists between the parties noted in the margin...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Karanpura Development Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-14-1982
Reported in: (1982)31CTR(Cal)170,[1983]144ITR538(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. 1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the following question has been referred to this court:' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the expenditure of Rs. 32,184 incurred in shifting the assessee's laboratory to new premises was a revenue expenditure and was allowable under Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act,. 1961 '2. The assessee is the Karanpura Development Co. Ltd. and the relevant assessment year was 1965-66 with the accounting period ending on 31st December, 1964. In the course of assessment proceedings the ITO noticed a claim for allowance of Rs. 32,184 representing the expenditure incurred in shifting the assessee's laboratory from the Chartered Bank Building to the premises of the Lansdowne Jute Mills Co. Ltd. The amount included the expenses for refitting plant and apparatus in the new premises. According to the ITO, the expenditure was incurred for better working of the laboratory and for research and...
Tag this Judgment!Indian Rayon Corporation Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-14-1982
Reported in: 1988(33)ELT320(Cal),1988(35)ELT455(Cal)
P.C. Barooah, J.1. The subject-matter of challenge in this rule is an order dated 8th June, 1980, passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta IV Division, confirming a demand made under Rule 10(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. A copy of this order is annexure E to the writ petition. This order was passed pursuant to a show cause-cum-demand notice dated 1st February, 1980, served on the petitioner 'by Sri A.K. Majumder, Superintendent of Central Excise, Jayashree Range, Rishra. A copy of the show cause-cum-demand notice is ann.exure C to the petition.2. I have heard Mr. Mallick for the petitioner and Mr. Shivaji Mitra for the excise authorities. I have gone through the impugned finding and order of the Assistant Collector dated 8th June, 1980. The order was passed ex parte inasmuch as the Assistant Collector did not give any adjournment to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner's representative was unable to attend due to his being busy with some court c...
Tag this Judgment!Mohanlal Soni Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-11-1982
Reported in: (1983)33CTR(Cal)193,87CWN146,[1983]143ITR436(Cal)
Pradyot Kumar Banerjee, J. 1. In this rule the petitioner challenges the appellate order passed by the AAC, The appellate order is in the following terms;' IN THE OFFICE OF THE APPELLATE ASSISTANTCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX:RANGE : 'AF': CALCUTTADate of order : 30-12-72 Appeal No. 59. AF/HC/Cal. 71-72.Instituted on the 17th March, 1972, from the order of the Income-tax Officer of E-Ward/HC/Cal. (Sri P.N. Ghosh):(1)Year of assessment. 1967-68(2)Name of appellant. M/s. Mohanlal Soni(3)Income assessed. Rs. 73,970(4) Taxdemanded -- Income-tax/ Super-tax. Rs. 11,366(5)Section under which assessment was made. 143(3)Date of hearing : 28-12-1972Present for appellant: Sri I.C. Sancheti, Advocate.APPELLATE ordER AND GROUND OF DECISION.The present appeal is against the I.T. assessment order for the assessment year 1967-68 passed by the ITO, E-Ward/HC/Cal. on 31-1-72.2. At the time of appeal hearing, the objection was taken to the disallowance of general expenses to the tune of Rs. 2,000. Before me...
Tag this Judgment!Ratanlal Mohta and Sons Vs. Income-tax Officer, c Ward and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-1982
Reported in: [1984]148ITR246(Cal)
M.N. Roy, J.1. Sarvashree Ratanlal Mohta, Hanumandas Mohta, Basanta Kumar Mohta and Suresh Kumar Mohta having equal shares, formed a partnership, viz., the petitioner firm, for the purpose of carrying on the business of purchase and sale of rice and paddy, apart from manufacturing and selling of plastic goods. It has been stated that for the assessment year 1960-61 corresponding to 2015-16 Dewali (hereinafter referred to as 'the said assessment year'), the petitioner firm was assessed by the ITO, B-Ward, District 24-Parganas, being respondent No. 2, who at the material time was one H. V. Upadhyay, under Section 23(3) read with Section 23(5)(a) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said 1922 Act'), and the total income was computed at Rs. 7,671. Such fact, excepting the amount was admitted, and the assessment in question was made on September 5, 1960, on a total income of Rs. 13,962 taking the status of the assessee as a registered firm. The income as computed ha...
Tag this Judgment!Punjab Produce and Trading Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-08-1982
Reported in: (1983)34CTR(Cal)206,[1984]146ITR95(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. In this reference under Sub-section (2) of Section 256 of the I.T. Act, 1961, as directed by this court, for the assessment years 1961-62 to 1967-68 the following questions have been referred to us :For the years 1961-62 to 1967-68 '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the proceedings initiated under Section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, were valid and legal ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that there was no relationship of employer and employee between the assessee-company and Shri A.V. Birla, Smt. Priyamvada Devi Birla and Smt. Sunanda Devi Birla : 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the remuneration paid to Shri A.V. Birla, Smt. Sunanda Devi Birla and Smt. Priyamvada Devi Birla were not incidental to the business and could not be allowed as business expenditure ? 4. Whether, on the facts...
Tag this Judgment!Avery India Ltd. Vs. Controller, Weights and Measures, Govt. of West B ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-07-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Cal520
M.M. Dutta, J. 1. In this appeal the appellant, Avery India Limited, has challenged the propriety of the judgment of a learned single Judge of this Court whereby the learned Judges discharged the rule nisi obtained by the appellant on its application under Article 226 of the Constitution. 2. The principal question that is involved in this appeal is whether the appellant is liable to disclose in the fortnightly returns that are submitted by him under the West Bengal Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1958, the sets of component parts which if assembled, would make complete weighing machines. In this connection, we may refer to the provision of Sub-section (2) of Section 9 of the Act which provides that no weighing instrument or measuring instrument shall be sold or delivered or used in any transaction unless it has been verified or revivified in accordance with the rules mad? under the Act and stamped with a stamp of verification in such manner as may be prescribed. Ru...
Tag this Judgment!Alok Kumar Aich Vs. Asoke Kumar Aich and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-07-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Cal599
Chtttatosh Mookerjee, J.1. The learned Additional District Judge. 9th Court, Alipore by his judgment and decree complained of has rejected the caveat filed by the appellant and has directed that the probate be issued in favour of the respondent No. 1, Alok Kumar Aich, in respect of the alleged will of late Amarendra Chandra Aich, who died on 29th Dec. 1975. The appellant and the respondent No, 1 are respectively the eldest and the youngest sons of the deceased testator. Amarendra Chandra Aich, the respondent No. 2 is his widow and the respondents 3 and 4 are his daughters.2. Mr. M.N. Ghosh, learned advocate on behalf of the appellant, has submitted that the respondent No. 1 who propounded the aforesaid will of deceased Amarendra Chandra Aich, could not and did not prove the due execution and attestation of the said will and also could not and did not explain the suspicious circumstances relating to the probatp in respect of the said alleged will of Amarendra and therefore he ought to b...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »