Kolkata Court August 1982 Judgments
Sailendra Nath Roy Chowdhury Vs. Md. Alim and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-30-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Cal180,87CWN271
ORDERNirmal Chandra Mukherji, J. 1. This Rule arises on an application under Section 115 of the Code and is directed against Order No. 52 dated 15th Feb., 1979, passed by Shri R. Chatterji, Judge, 4th Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta in Title Suit No. 842 of 1976. By the said order, the learned Judge allowed an application under Section 151 of the Code filed by the defendant and set aside the compromise decree and further ordered the suit or proceedings to proceed in accordance with law. The facts of the case may briefly be stated as follows :--2. The premises No. 13/1B, Marsden Street, now known as 13/1, Pemantle Street, Calcutta, belonged to the Trust Estate of Dr. Ajita Nath Roy Chowdhury, since deceased, and Dr. Amarendra Nath Roy Choudhury, since deceased and the petitioner was the joint trustee to the said Trust Estate. The opposite party No. 1 was inducted as a licensee in respect of six rooms on the ground floor. As the opposite party No. 1 failed to vacate the premises on r...
Tag this Judgment!Hiralal Shaw and ors. Vs. Samarendra Nath Karuri and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-30-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Cal185
M.M. Dutt, J. 1. By consent of the parties the appeal is treated as on day's list.2. The appeal has been filed by the appellants who are the stall holders in the Bowbazar market. The respondents Samarendra Nath Karuri and Deba Prosad Karuri, trustees to the trust estate of late Nandalal Karuri, the owners of the Bowbazar Market situated at premises Nos. 84/A, 84/1A and 84/3A Bipin Behary Ganguly Street, Calcutta, filed a writ petition before the learned Judge alleging that some unauthorised persons had constructed temporary tin sheds in the passage inside the market thereby inconveniencing the daily user of the said market and adding to the congestion. The Corporation of Calcutta also appeared before the learned Judge. The learned Judge, after hearing the writ petitioners and the Corporation of Calcutta, directed the Commissioner of the Corporation of Calcutta to cause notices to be served on the ownen and/or occupiers of such unauthorised structures inside the market within a period o...
Tag this Judgment!Indian Explosives Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-30-1982
Reported in: (1983)35CTR(Cal)244,[1984]147ITR392(Cal)
1. This consolidated reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, relates to assessment years 1965-66, 1966-67 and 1968-69, the correspondingprevious years ending respectively on the 30th September, of the calendar years 1964, 1965 and 1967. The facts found and/or admitted in the reference are as follows :Indian Explosives Ltd., the assessee, carries on business of manufacture of explosives. Its factory is situated at Gomiah, in the district of Hazaribagh within the State of Bihar. For the convenience of executives who had to travel between Gomiah and Calcutta frequently in connection with the assessee's business, the assessee decided to construct an airstrip in the neighbourhood of Gomiah and purchase an aircraft to be used for such journeys. The assessee entered into an agreement in writing dated 3rd May, 1968, with the National Coal Development Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation), under which a licence and/or permission was granted to the assessee in re...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Briksh Jadab Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-30-1982
Reported in: 1983CriLJ39
ORDERAmitabha Dutta, J.1. This revisional application is directed against an order dated 25-1- 1982 passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sealdah rejecting the petitioner's plea that the proceeding in case EB. GR 69 of 1981, Section N/E. B-264 dated 21-7-1981 under Section 7(1)(a)(i) of the Essential Commodities Act is not maintainable.2. It appears that the police of Enforcement Branch searched the godown of M/s. Mitra Trading Co., which is a partnership firm and a wholesale dealer in cement on 21-7-1981 and found that discrepancy between the actual stock of cement and the stock shown in the stock register, amounting to 636 baas short. So the police seized the aforesaid bags of cement and arrested the petitioner who was the godown-keeper of the said go-down and produced him before the learned Magistrate on the next day. The police continued investigation of the case and ultimately submitted challans under Section 7(1)(a)(i) of the Essential Commodities Act against the...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India and ors. Vs. Shri Ramniwas Chaudhury
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-27-1982
Reported in: 1983LC608D(Calcutta),1987(30)ELT118(Cal)
Morari Mohan Dutt, J.1. The Customs Authorities and the Union of India have filed an appeal against two interlocutory orders dated June 21, 1982 and July 12, 1982 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court. The said two interlocutory orders have been passed by the learned Judge in the Rule Nisi issued on the writ petition of Ramniwas Choudhury, carrying on business under the trade name of Choudhury Shipbreaking Co. By the first order, the learned Judge restrained the Central Government from proceeding with a revision case suo moto started by it against the petitioner under Section 131(3) of the Customs Act, 1962 and, by the second order, the learned Judge directed the Customs Authorities to refund to the petitioner a sum of Rs. 35,98,428/- plus Rs. 2,91,000/- upon furnishing a bank guarantee for the aggregate of the said amounts. It may be stated at the outset that the said sum of Rs. 2,91,000/- is included within the said sum of Rs. 35,98,428/- which has been admittedly paid by th...
Tag this Judgment!Amalendu Gupta and ors. Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-25-1982
Reported in: (1982)IILLJ332Cal
P.C. Borooah, J.1. By a bipartite settlement dated 24-1-74 under Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act; made by and between the Management of the respondent No. 1 and the All India Insurance Employees' Association, representing Class III and Class IV employees of the said respondent, the respondent No. 1 was to pay annual cash bonus, not being profit sharing bonus, to their Class III and Class IV employees at the rate of 15% of their annual wages inclusive of all allowance. A copy of the settlement has been annexed to the petition and marked with the letter 'A'.2. The respondent No. 1 not having paid the annual cash bonus in terms of the settlement, the Class III and Class IV employees of the respondent-Corporation came before this Hon'ble Court and filed Writ petition through some of their representative employees and the All India Insurance Employees' Association and obtained a Rule, being Matter No. 371 of 1976. By a judgment delivere...
Tag this Judgment!Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Purushottamdas Bangur
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-23-1982
Reported in: [1984]146ITR44(Cal)
Sabyasacht Mukharji, J.1. In this reference under Section 64(3) of the E.D. Act, 1953, the following question has been referred to this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances, of the case, and on a proper construction of the partnership deed dated the twenty-second day of April, one thousand nine hundred and forty-six, the Tribunal was right in holding that the value of the deceased's share in the assets of the firm constituted under the said deed should be estimated in accordance with the provisions of the said partnership deed and should not be estimated to be the price which it would fetch if sold in the open market at the time of the deceased's death ?'2. The estate duty proceedings arose, consequent on the demise of one Sri Narayandas Bangur, on 23rd July, 1955. Sri Bangur was a partner along with four others in a firm called Mugneeram Bangur & Co. This firm was constituted under a partnership deed dated 22nd April, 1946. According to the deed Narayandas Bangur had,...
Tag this Judgment!Avery India Limited Vs. the Commercial Tax Officer, Esplanade Charge a ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-19-1982
Reported in: [1983]52STC297(Cal)
M.N. Roy, J. 1. The petitioner, M/s. Avery India Limited (hereinafter referred to as the said petitioner) was incorporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1913, and has its registered office and carries on business, inter alia, at 28/2, Waterloo Street, Calcutta. Such business has been stated to be consisting in the manufacture and sale of weighing and testing machines of various descriptions, and the parts thereof. The said petitioner has also been stated to be duly registered under the provisions of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and has also been stated to be assessed regularly to sales tax.2. In respect of the period containing the four quarters ended 31st December, 1960, the said petitioner claimed a deduction under the provisions of Section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the said Act to the tune of Rs. 5,51,014.40 and Rs. 71,478.70 and thus for a total sum of Rs. 6,22,493.10 in respect of the goods which were claimed to be sol...
Tag this Judgment!Indian Oil Corporation Vs. Himangshu Kumar Ghosh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-17-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Cal87,86CWN1099
Anil K. Sen, J. 1. This appeal from an appellate decree is at the instance of the defendant in a suit for eviction which had been decreed concurrently by the two Courts below. One Sm. Tripti Ghose, wife of the present plaintiff was the owner of premises No. 13, South End Park, which is a four-storeyed building. The first floor and the garage at the ground floor of the said premises more fully described in the plaint schedule was let out by the said Sm. Ghose to the defendant-appellant, Indian Oil Corporation at a monthly rental of Rs. 500/- payable according to English calendar. The said Sm. Ghose died on January 7, 1976, leaving behind a will executed by her on November 11, 1975. The plaintiff as the executor appointed by the testatrix obtained probate of the will. By the will the testatrix bequeathed the 2nd floor of the premises as aforesaid to her eldest son Hirak, 3rd floor to her second son Himadri and first and ground floors to her youngest son Sanjoy subject to a right of resid...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Stanton and Stavely (Overseas) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-16-1982
Reported in: (1983)36CTR(Cal)224,[1984]146ITR405(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 Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the amounts described as 'commission' in the agreement dated 9th October, 1956, between the asses-see and the Indian Iron and Steel Co. were in the nature of royalties and fees covered by the exemption provided in Rule l(ix) and Rule l(x) of the First Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, and were liable to be excluded from the total income of the assessee in computing the chargeable profits for the assessment years 1965-66, 1966-67, 1967-68 and 1969-70?'2. This reference arises out of the assessment for the assessment years 1965-66, 1966-67, 1967-68 and 1969-70 under the provisions of the C.(P.) S.T. Act, 1964. Now it would be relevant to refer to the relevant provisions of the said Act. The First Schedule to the said A...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »