Kolkata Court July 1982 Judgments
Bijoli Grill Spencer's Product Vs. Spencers and Co. Ltd. and Anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-21-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Cal175
ORDERPadma Khastgir, J. 1. This application has been taken out by Bijoli Gril Spencer's Product, a firm, against Spencers & Co. Ltd. and Spencer Acrated Water Factory Pvt. Ltd. (in Liquidation) for an order of injunction restraining the defendant No. 1 Spencers & Co. Ltd. and its servants, agents and assigns in any way from interfering with the petitioner's right to use and enjoy the trade mark and/or associated marks and the trade name 'Spencer' as successor-in-intercst of the defendant No. 2 concurrently with the defendant No. 1 in relation to mineral aerated waters and beverages and for other consequential reliefs.2. In the plaint filed by the plaintiff against the defendants the plaintiff has asked for declaration to the effect that the defen-dant No. 2 was the registered proprietor of the trade marks and associated trade marks mentioned in the plaint and the trade name 'spencer'. Further, it was entitled to use its trade name containing the word 'spencer' in relation to mineral, a...
Tag this Judgment!Traders Syndicate Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-21-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Cal337
ORDERPratibha Bonnerjea, J.1. The plaintiff sued the defendant on two contracts of carriage of goods for recovery of compensation for non-delivery of the consignments.2. On 28-6-64, the plaintiff a Dutta-pukur delivered to the Eastern Railway 6 rolls of galvanised wire netting 19,200 sq. ft. for carrying the same a Railway's risk to Mal junction through N.F. Rly. and the defendant issued R/R No. A 116018 dated 28-6-64 in respect to the same. The goods were to be delivered to the consignee. Sub-Divisional Officer (P.W.D.) Mal Construction Sub-division. The defendant failed to deliver the goods at the destination. A claim was duly lodged with the Chief Commercial Superintendent (Claim) N. F. Railway to the extent of Rs. 7207.68 hut the defendant failed to pay the said sum or any part thereof. The defendant in the written statement alleged that these goods were duly delivered at Nasrakata on 22-7-64 against a clear receipt dated 25-7-64 and the plaintiff was duly informed about the same b...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Surinder Singh Atwal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-20-1982
Reported in: [1984]146ITR272(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J.1. Two questions of law have been referred by the Tribunal Under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, to this court for an answer:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal misdirected itself in law in holding that the proceedings under Section 155 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the amendment of the assessment order passed in the case of the assessee was not a proceeding in connection with the regular assessment within the meaning of Section 273 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and in that view holding that the proceedings tinder Section 273 of the said Act had not been validly initiated ? 2. If the answer to question No. 1 is in the affirmative, whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the penalty under Section 273(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, could be imposed on the assessee ?' 2. The respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee') is an individual. The assessment year is 1958-59 and the relevant accou...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. East Asiatic Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-19-1982
Reported in: (1983)35CTR(Cal)220,[1984]148ITR124(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J. 1. The Tribunal has referred under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the following three questions to this court: '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was entitled to get depreciation allowance under Rule 5 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, even in respect of ships which had formed part of the assessee's fleet for more than 20 years (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that no profit chargeable to tax within the meaning of Section 41(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of any of the ships sold by the assessee could be included in the computation of the total profits and gains of the assessee's business under Rule 10(ii) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that in the computation of the total profits and gains of the assessee'...
Tag this Judgment!Binani Printers (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-19-1982
Reported in: (1983)32CTR(Cal)332,[1983]143ITR338(Cal)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1970-71 the following question has been referred to this court; 'Whether on a true interpretation of the provisions of Section 25FFF of the I.D, Act, 1947, the notice pay of Rs. 10,233 and retrenchment compensation of Rs. 52,121 paid by the assessee thereunder to its employees of printing business was an admissible deduction under Section 37 or Section 28 of the I.T. Act, 1961?'2. The facts of the case are as follows : 'This reference relates to the assessment year 1969-70 only and arises out of the Tribunal's order in so far 'as it related to the Department's appeal, I.T.A. No. 4650 (Cal) of (969-70. The assessee-company follows the calendar year as its accounting year. It was formerly engaged in two lines of business, one being the printing business and the other being publication of a journal called 'The Eastern Metal Review.' In the printing establishment the assessee was...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. A. Ghosh Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-19-1982
Reported in: [1983]141ITR45(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J. 1. This case arises out of an order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in I.T.A. No. 5105 (Cal) of 1972-73preferred by Mrs. Anna Ghosh. The relevant assessment year being the assessment year 1965-66. 2. Mrs. Anna Ghosh had acquired 433 debenture bonds of the value of Rs. 4 3,300 of M/s. Standard Pharmaceutical Ltd. on 20th December, 1962. Similarly, Dr. H. Ghosh had acquired 365 debenture bonds of the value of Rs. 36,500 of M/s. Standard Pharmaceutical Ltd. on 20th December, 1962. Under the second mortgage debenture trust deed dated 21st September, 1963, the debenture holders had the option to exchange the debentures into fully paid up equity shares. Mrs. Ghosh had exercised her option on 1st October, 1963, and exchanged 433 debenture bonds for 4,330 equity shares of Rs. 10 each. She sold 4,000 shares to M/s. Synbiotics Ltd. of Ahmedabad for Rs. 1,24,000 on March 30, 1964, earning a surplus of Rs. 84,000. Similarly, Dr. Ghosh had exercised the option on 1...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Bihar and ors. Vs. Keshab Narayan Banerjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-19-1982
Reported in: 1982CriLJ1768
Sambhu Chandra Ghose, C.J.1. This is an application inter alia for stay of an order passed by T. K. Basu, J. on 5th April, 1982 directing the issue of a rule nisi as prayed for and an ad interim injunction directing the petitioner in the writ application Keshab Narayan Banerjee to withdraw the interest accruing on the properties attached.2. On 22nd of Jan. 1982 on an application made by the Inspector General (Vigilance) Bihar, the District Judge, Alipore passed an order of ad interim injunction under Section 4(1) of the Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, 1944. The learned District Judge directed that a copy of the said order be handed over to the Central Manbhum Coal Company Ltd.3. On 12th Feb. 1982, the Central Manbhum Coal Company Limited and Keshab Narayan Banerjee moved an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the said order of attachment before Sabyasach Mukharji, J. His Lordship issued a rule nisi and stayed further proceedings. On 5th of March, 1982 S...
Tag this Judgment!Pannalal Bafna Vs. Kalpana Rani Bhowmick and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Cal11
ORDERPradyot Kumar Banerjee, J.1. This application is at the instance of the tenant for an injunction in respect of the premises from which he has been evicted in due course of law by an ex parte decree passed against him. An application was made under Order 9. Rule 13 C. P. C. The application was rejected. An appeal was taken. The appeal was dismissed. A revisional application was moved in this Court and the learned single Judge directed that the appeal against the order passed in Order 9, Rule 13 C. P. C. must be reheard in respect of the question of limitation only which unfortunately went against the petitioner. The petitioner again moved this Court and this Court rejected the application. Hence the petitioner filed a suit alleging for misrepresentation, non-service of summons and falsity of claim as against the decree-holder in getting the decree exparte against the petitioner. An application was made for an injunction restraining the opposite party landlady from executing the dec...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Laxmi Moni Basak and ors. Vs. Kedar Nath Basak and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Cal559
R.N. Pyne, J.1. A question concerning determination of the court-fees arises for consideration in this appeal which is directed against the judgment and order of Mrs. Khastgir, J. dated Feb. 11, 1980.2. The plaintiffs-appellants filed Suit No. 402 of 1979 (Smt. Laxmi Moni Basak v. Kedar Nath Basak) concerning the trust property under a Deed of Settlement dated 9th Oct., 1934 executed by one Madhab Ballav Basak. The said Deed of Settlement was in respect of three properties namely, 350-A, 350-B and 350/1, Upper Chitpur Road (now known respectively Nos. 327/1, 327/2 and 325, Rabindra Sarani) Calcutta. It appears that by the deed of transfer dated 24th June, 1950 premises Nos. 350-A and 350-B, Upper Chitpur Road were transferred to and vested absolutely in the beneficiaries mentioned in the said deed. The trust is, however, still operating in respect of premises No. 350/1, Upper Chitpur Road (No. 325 Rabindra Sarani), Calcutta. It is stated in the plaint that the defendants Nos. 1, 3 and ...
Tag this Judgment!AtIn Bose Vs. Heavy Engineering Corporation Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-14-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Cal376
Ramendra Mohan Datta, J.1. This appeal arises from the judgment and order of Sabyasachi Mukharji, J., dated 29th September, 1977 ; (AIR 1976 NOC 200) in an application under Section 34, Arbitration Act, 1940. The learned Judge by his order has stayed the suit of the plaintiff Atin Bose, the appellant herein, filed by Mm on or about the 20th June 1977.2. The claim arose out of a contract dated 25th September, 1974 between Heavy Engineering Corporation Ltd, and Messrs. K. Lall & Co. a proprietary concern of the plaintiff Atin Bose. The contractor Atin Bose was to be paid by the respondent Corporation for providing escorts at the rate shown in the schedule of rates of the work as per terms andconditions of the contract. The said schedule including the notes thereof was to form an integral part of the said contract. Both the parties agreed that the terms and conditions as provided in the special conditions of contract and in general conditions of contract, would be applicable and would be ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »