Kolkata Court April 1984 Judgments
Jayantilal Chhaganlal Kampani and anr. Vs. Smt. Indira Hazra
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Cal83,88CWN874
ORDERS.N. Sanyal, J.1. This is an application under Section 115 of the Civil P.C. by the defendants against the order dated April 21, 1982 passed by the learned Munsif, 4th Court, Alipore in Title Suit No. 226 of 1980. The opposite party, Smt. Indira Hazra, instituted the suit against the petitioners Jayantilal Chhaganlal Kampani and Hemchand Ramchand Jaitha for ejectment and mesne profits. The case of the opposite party is that the petitioner No. 1 was a tenant under her in respect of the suit premises at a monthly rental of Rs. 240/-. The petitioner No. 1, without the previous consent in writing or otherwise of the opposite party, transferred and assigned the suit premises as a whole or sublet it to the opposite party No. 2. The suit premises are reasonably required for her own occupation. Both the defendants, who are petitioners in the present Rule, contested the suit by filing separte written statements. Both the petitioners also filed separate applications under Section 17(2) of t...
Tag this Judgment!A.K. Bajaj Vs. Nandy Trading Co. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Cal202,88CWN737
Anil K. Sen, J.1. The revisional application (C. O. 3080/83) has been filed along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act (C.O. 3079/83). There was ten days' delay in filing the revisional application. Having heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and considering the facts and circumstances set out in the application, we are satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not preferring the revisional application within the period of limitation. 2. The delay in moving the revisional application (C.O. 3080/83) is, therefore, condoned and the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act (C.O. 3079/83) is allowed. Re : C. O. 3080/83 : 3. This revisional application is at the instance of the plaintiff in Money Suit No. 98/83 of the 2nd Bench of the learned Judge, City Civil Court, Calcutta The order impugned is one D/- 21-6-1983. 4 . The plaintiff as the endorsee of several Hundis drawn by the defendant instituted the above suit for recovery of a total sum of Rs...
Tag this Judgment!Sunil Kumar Das Vs. Assistant Controller of Estate Duty.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-28-1984
Reported in: [1984]10ITD31(Cal)
ORDERPer Shri H. S. Ahluwalia, Judicial Member - The dispute in this appeal relates to the value of 850 shares held by the deceased in the Engle Lithographing Co. (P.) Ltd. for the purpose of computation of net principal value of his estate.2. Assistant Controller chose to value the shares on the method of break-up value but in so doing he added a sum of Rs. 16,07,800 as goodwill of the company on the basis of three years super profits instead of Rs. 16,368 shown in the balance sheet. He also did not choose to follow the method prescribed in rule ID of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957 (the 1957 Rules) and, consequently did not grant 15 per cent reduction in the break-up value as provided for therein.3. On appeal, the Appellate Controller upheld the valuation of the Assistant Controller except for the purpose of determining the goodwill he took the rate of capitalisation at three times of the average profit of three years which resulted in a reduction of Rs. 5,35,943 from the total assets of ...
Tag this Judgment!S. K. Trading Co. Vs. Income-tax Officer.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-28-1984
Reported in: [1986]17ITD1017(Cal)
ORDERPer Shri A. R. Haldar, Judicial Member - this appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) relating to the assessment year 1978-79.2. The first ground pertains to the disallowance of Rs. 50,400 being short-term capital loss on transfer of shares.3. The assess-firm claimed to have purchased 34,050 shares of Sree Bihar Jute Twine Mills Ltd. in the names of its patrners, sometime in 1975. During the previous year relevant to the assessment year under appeal, the assessee claimed to have sold 6300 shares to its partners at the rate of Rs. 2 per share as against Rs. 10 per share. The assessee, therefore, claimed a short-term capital loss of Rs. 50,400. The ITO disallowed this claim of the assessee on the ground of unity of identity of a firm and its partners and the impossibility of dealing between the firm and its partners.4. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner (Appeals) who confirmed the action of the ITO by relying on a number of decisions...
Tag this Judgment!Parmal Ghosh Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-27-1984
Reported in: 1984CriLJ1302
N.G. Chaudhuri, J.1. Six accused-respondents herein faced a Sessions trial on charges under Sections 148, 302/149, 302/34 and 323/34 I.P.C. The allegations made against them were that while Parimal Ghosh, Krishna Ghosh, Biren Pramanick, Gopinath Ghosh and Nitya Ghosh after watching their cultivation on a piece of char land were taking rest in a boat anchored in river Bhaghirathi close to village Malinipara, P. S. Beldanga, District Murshidabad, the respondents formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with the common object of making murderous assault on the aforesaid persons, equipped themselves with deadly weapons locally known as Pattangi, Jabha etc, and attacked the abovenamed persons in the boat aforesaid soon after midnight between 24th and 25th April, 1980. Nitya Ghosh and Gopinath Ghosh succumbed to their injuries within a few hours of receiving them. After considering the evidence adduced, the learned Additional Sessions Judge 4th Court, Murshidabad, by his judgment D/-24.8....
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Abdul Sattar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-27-1984
Reported in: 1984(3)ECC46,1985LC29(Calcutta)
Anil K. Sen, J.1. An application for stay in connection with the above appeal having come up for hearing on contest before us, we have, with the consent of the parties, heard the appeal and the application together. The appeal has been preferred by the Union of India. The order challenged is one dated 16th December, 1983, passed by a learned single Judge of this Court thereby extending an ad interim order of injunction earlier granted on 26th August, 1983, until disposal of the writ petition. The ad interim order of injunction that was so extended was on the following terms: There will be an interim order of injunction to this extent that on the petitioner's undertaking to report to the Officer-in-Charge, Ekbalpore Police Station, Calcutta, once a week the authorities are restrained from putting the petitioner under detention under the provisions of the conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974. In the event the petitioner fails to report as dire...
Tag this Judgment!Narayan Chandra Pramanik Vs. Ananda Mandal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-27-1984
Reported in: 1984CriLJ1334
B.C. Chakrabarti, J.1. petitioner Narayan Chandra Pramanik is a Sub-Inspector of Police attached to the office of the District Enforcement Officer, Beldanga, District-Murshidabad. The Opposite Party No. 1, Ananda Mondal filed a complaint against the petitioner alleging commission of offences under Sections 149/323/326/307 I.P.C. In brief the allegation was that on Oct. 20, 1980 while the complainant was washing his mouth at the tank near his house in Dakshin Bachhra, some muslims of the village were attempting to sacrifice a cow on the northern bank of the tank. Some Police personnel were presenter the spot. The complainant and others while passing by the southern bank of the tank were attacked with brick bats. At that time some police personnel came on the southern bank of the tank and suddenly fired on him without provocation. S.I., Narayan Chandra Pramanik fired from his revolver, as a result of which the complainant, Paltu and Patal Ghosh were injured.2. After the complaint was fil...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer Vs. NavIn Industries and Mercantile
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-26-1984
Reported in: (1984)10ITD88(Kol.)
1. That, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), erred in law in holding that the fact that the assessee did not claim deduction for gratuity liability of Rs. 3,17,911 at the time of assessment is no bar to the consideration of this claim on merit at the appeal stage ; 2. that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in law as well as on facts in holding that the provision for initial contribution to an approved gratuity fund is deductible under Section 36(1)(v) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ; 3. that, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), erred in law in allowing the deduction of Rs. 3,17,911 on account of provision for gratuity liability ignoring the provisions of Section 155(13) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ; 4. that, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), erred in law as well as on facts in allowing the provision for Rs. 3,17,911 for payment of gratuity for the period up to 31-3-1973 in the assessment for the assessment year 1974-75.2. In the original assessment the as...
Tag this Judgment!Nishit Kumar Sikdar Gobinda Saraya Vs. Sunil Kumar Bose
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-26-1984
Reported in: AIR1984Cal371,88CWN971
Anil K. Sen, J. 1. An order dt. Aug. 8, 1983, passed by the Additional Rent Controller, Barrackpore in Rent Control Case No. 60 of 1982 is the subject-matter of challenge in this revisional application preferred by the landlord. The proceeding before the Rent Controller is a proceeding for fixation of fair rent under the provision of Section 8 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). By the order impugned, the Rent Controller had decided a preliminary point with regard to the maintainability of the proceeding in favour of the tenant. The objection as to maintainability was raised by the landlord under the following circumstances.2. It is not in dispute that the tenant opposite party came to occupy the ground floor of premises No. 78, Municipal Office Lane, under the landlord in terms of a tenancy agreement dt. 23-1-1981. The monthly rent initially payable under the agreement was Rs. 480/-but the agreement provided for periodical increase in ren...
Tag this Judgment!Nabadwip Bera Vs. Balai Chandra Porey and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-25-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Cal216
1. Appeal against the Decree of Sri K. C. Mukherjee, Additional Judge, 2nd Court, Chinsurah, Hooghly in Title Appeal No. 283 of 1966 dated the 10th day of Feb. 1963 affirming the decree of Sri S. K. Mitra, Munsif, 1st Court, Chandarnagore, dated the 31st day of May, 1966.2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned lower appellate Court in Title Appeal No. 283 of 1966 affirming the judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No. 154 of 1965. The suit was filed by the plaintiffappellant for declaration of title and recovery of possession in the disputed property which is dag No. 335 in Mouza Anandanagar. This land belonged to one Bishnupada Maity and his aunt Badammoyee Dassi in moity shares. On the death of Badammoyee, who had no issue,Bhishnupada possessed the entire land as a tenant. In lieu of rent, he used to supply fruits to the deity Shib Thakur for one day during Gajan. It was a grant of land which he enjoyed burdened with service. After the Esta...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »