Kolkata Court September 1984 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Chloride India Limited Vs. Ganeshdas Ramgopal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-14-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Cal229
G.N. Ray, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Calcutta in Ejectment Suit No. 885 of 1976. The defendant is the appellant in the instant appeal and the said suit was instituted by the plaintiff respondent for eviction of the defendant from the disputed premises in question on the ground of subletting and also on the ground of default. Prior to the institution of the suit, the tenancy of the defendant was determined by a notice to quit.2. It is the case of the plaintiff-respondent that the defendant is a public limited company constituted and incorporated under the Companies Act and previously, one Sri Rabindra Kumar Kapur was a tenant under the plaintiff in respect of Flat No. 14, on the first floor of the premises No. 42B, Shakrspeare Sarani (previously known as Theatre Road). The said Kapur was an employee of Associated Battery Makers (Eastern) Limited and was a tenant at a monthly rent of Rs. 700/- payable...
Bejoy Kumar Karnani and anr. Vs. Assistant Registrar of Companies and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-13-1984
Reported in: [1985]58CompCas293(Cal),(1985)1CompLJ98(Cal),88CWN1073
Sankar Bhattacharyya, J.1. On a complaint filed before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, 24-Parganas, by opposite party No. 1, in this rule, the Assistant Registrar of Companies, the two petitioners before us, the directors of M/s. Sukhlal Chandanmul P. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the company') with its registered office at No. 23/21, Gariahat Road, Calcutta-29, have been summoned to face trial under Section 210(5) of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Act').2. The allegations made in the above complaint is that though the petitioners were under a statutory obligation under the Act to lay before the company at its annual general meeting which should have been held in pursuance of Section 166 of the Act by September 30, 1977, at the latest, its balance-sheet and profit and loss account for the financial year ending on March 31, 1977, they failed and neglected to do so in compliance with the provisions of Section 210 (1), (3), of the Act in spite of refe...
Sudhir Kumar Saha and ors. Vs. J.N. Chemicals Private Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-12-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Cal454
ORDERC.K. Banerji, J.1. This is an application for stay of the suit being Suit No, 17 of 1983 instituted in this Court by J. N. Chemicals Private Ltd. thereinafter referred to as the Company) against Sudhir Kumar Saha & Ors. The reliefs claimed in the suit, inter alia, are (i) declaration that the plaintiff is a sub-tenant under Saha Films in respect of a portion of premises No. 72/2/1. Lenin Sarani, Calcutta and is entitled to remain in occupation and possession thereof, (ii) perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's right in respect of its said sub-tenancy, (iii) declaration that the direction or award of the Arbitrator Mr. Shjbaji Sen, inter alia, directing the plaintiff to vacate its city office at No. 77/2/1, Lenin Sarani, Calcutta, is invalid, unenforceable and not binding on the plaintiff.2. The application is made both under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 and Section 151 of the C.P.C.3. No arguments have, however, been made o...
Balish Singh and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-11-1984
Reported in: [1987]165ITR575(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J. 1. The Tribunal has referred the following question of law under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessments made by the Income-tax Officer on February 26, 1970, and February 15, 1974, respectively, for the two years under reference were not barred by limitation ?'2. The relevant assessment years are the assessment years 1964-65 and 1970-71 and the corresponding accounting years ended on November 15, 1963, and November 9, 1969, respectively.3. The assessee is a registered firm.4. The facts as found by the Tribunal are as under :For the years under reference, the assessee did not file its returns of income as contemplated under Section 139(1) of the Act nor was the assessee required to file its returns of income as contemplated under Section 139(2). On September 10, 1965, and August 17, 1970, the assessee suo motu filed its first set o...
Indian Explosives Ltd. and anr. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-11-1984
Reported in: [1986]62STC61(Cal)
Tarun Kumar Basu, Ag. C.J.1. The facts relating to the present application may be briefly noted.2. Petitioner No. 1, Indian Explosives Limited (hereinafter referred to as IEL), manufactures fertilizers at its factory in Panki, Kanpur. The essential raw material required for such manufacture is naphtha. Naphtha during the relevant time was manufactured by the Indian Oil Corporation (hereinafter referred to as IOC) inter alia at its Barauni refinery in Bihar.3. From September, 1969, naphtha was being supplied by IOC to IEL through a pipe-line connecting the Barauni refinery of IOC with the factory of IEL at Kanpur. The terms and conditions of such supply were recorded in an agreement between IEL and IOC dated 9th February, 1970. The agreement was effective from September, 1969, and was in force till 31st December, 1980.4. Clause 5 of the agreement is very material for the purpose of the present application. The relevant portions of that clause may be set out hereinbelow :Price5. The pric...
Orissa Oil Industry Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-10-1984
Reported in: 1985(5)ECC109
Ajit Kumar Sengupta, J.1. This application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 9th May, 1984 passed by the Collector of Customs, Calcutta, confiscating the goods under Section 111(d)/111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962 and giving an option to the petitioner under Section 125 of the said Act to clear the goods on payment of fine of Rs. 50,000. This application has been moved upon notice. 2. Mr. Amjad Ali, learned Advocate appearing for the respondents, has produced the records. It is agreed that the matter can be disposed of without any affidavit as the point involved in this application is purely a question of law. Mr. Ali has, submitted that the respondents, however, do not admit the correctness of the allegations made in the petition save as would appear from the records. 3. The facts which are appearing from the records and the petition are stated hereinafter. The petitioner, M/s. Orissa Oil Industry Limited, Calcutta had imported on 19th M...
Ashis Kumar Ghosh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-10-1984
Reported in: 1985CriLJ87
ORDERAmitabha Dutta, J.1.This contempt proceeding against the opposite party No. 1, Chairman, Board of Trustees for Calcutta Port Trust and the opposite party No. 2 the Chief Hydraulic Engineer, Calcutta Port Trust has been initiated on the application of the petitioner against whom an order dated 5-10-1983 dismissing him from the post of Electronic Instrument Engineer was passed by the opposite party No. 1, after considering the report of the inquiry into certain charges against the petitioner in a departmental proceeding. The said order of dismissal was served on him on 8-10-1983 and the learned Judge, Janah J. admitting the same, issued Rule and an interim order restraining the respondents including the present opposite parties Nos. 1 and 2, their agents, servants and subordinates from giving any effect or further effect to the impugned order of dismissal and the inquiry report dt. 28-8-82 in any way affecting the service of the petitioner and also from passing any final order on th...
Sreenivasa Pulvarising Industries Vs. Jai Glass and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-05-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Cal74,88CWN1070
Anil K. Sen, J.1. This revisional application at the instance of the defendant in a suit for recovery of damages for breach of a contract of sale of goods raises a short point as to whether such a suit can be entertained by a Court within whose territorial jurisdiction the price was payable.2. The plaintiff company has its registered office at 10, Jackson Lane, Calcutta. On May 31, 1978, at Bangalore the plaintiff entered into a contract with the defendant carrying on business at Mandanapalle, Andhra Pradesh for purchase of 400 bags of Tamarind to be despatched to Sodepur for delivery. The contract further provided that the defendant would present through their banker, Indian Bank, Main Branch, Brabourne Road, Calcutta, the railway receipt with their bill for payment by the plaintiff. The defendant failed and neglected to despatch the goods. The plaintiff had to purchase the goods at a higher price and hence they filed the suit for recovery of damages suffered by them for the breach of...
Pioneer Protective Glass Fibre P. Ltd. Vs. Fibre Glass Pilkington Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-05-1984
Reported in: [1986]60CompCas707(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J.1. Fibre Glass Pilkington Ltd., the respondent in this appeal, is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. By a special resolution, passed prior to April 15, 1982, the respondent changed its name to F.G.P. Ltd. The change was duly approved by the Central Government, This was recorded in a letter of the Regional Director, Company Law Board, Western Region, Bombay, dated April 15, 1982. A fresh certificate of incorporation recording the change of name of the respondent was issued by the Additional Registrar of Companies, Maharashtra, Bombay on April 15, 1982.2. On or about November 22, 1982, the respondent filed a suit in this court marked Suit No. 874 of 1982 against Pioneer Protective Glass FibreP. Ltd., the appellant, for price of goods sold and delivered to the appellant claiming, inter alia, Rs. 1,40,098.32 ; Rs. 75,654 on account of interest accrued; further interest and costs. In the cause title of the plaint filed in the suit, the respondent was de...
Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. JaIn Exports Pvt. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-04-1984
Reported in: 1988(35)ELT475(Cal)
Dipal Kumar Sen, J.1. The dispute before us arises out of an import of a consignment of palm stearine by 3ain Exports Private Limited, a registered Export House, under a licence issued against three registered export contracts. The said licence was acquired by the importer on the 27th July, 1982.2. The import which was from Malaysia was arranged for sometime in January, 1984 and the shipment was to be effected during the first half of March, 1984 subject to availability of vessel.3. Port workers, all over India, struck work from the 15th March, 1984 for an indefinite period. The strike however continued only till the 15th April, 1984. In view of the said strike which was announced in advance the consignment was not shipped as arranged.4. The importer moved a writ application on the 12th April, 1984 when a Rule nisi was issued. An interim order was passed as follows :'An interim order directing respondent No. 3 by itself, through its employees, officials, servants to clear the petitione...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »