Kolkata Court February 1989 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.
Chitra Sengupta Vs. Dhruba Jyoti Sengupta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-21-1989
Reported in: II(1990)DMC427
Amal Kumar Chatterjee, J. 1. In this appeal by the defendant against a decree of divorce on the ground stated in Section 13(1A)(ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, it has been urged on behalf of the appellant that the suit, having been brought by the respondent before the expiry of the statutory period of one year contemplated by the aforesaid section, was premature and further, looking to the provisions of Section 23(1)(a), no relief should have been granted in his favour as he was taking advantage of his own wrong. In order to substantiate the allegation of wrong conduct of the respondent, an application for production of additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 Civil Procedure Code was also filed.2. To develop the first point, the learned Advocate for the appellant has argued that although the suit for divorce was instituted one year after the date on which the decree for restitution of conjugal rights was granted, still the suit should be regarded as premature because the evidence dis...
Guest Keen Williams Ltd. Vs. Guest Keen Williams Junior Management Sta ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-17-1989
Reported in: (1989)1CALLT214(HC),1989(1)CHN185,93CWN462,[1990(60)FLR458],(1990)IILLJ522Cal
Monoj Kumar Mukherjee. J.1. This appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent is directed against the order dated December 6, 1988 passed by a learned Judge of this Court issuing a Rule Nisi and an interim injunction on a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by Guest Keen Williams Junior Management Staff Association ('Association' for short) and its five members. Facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of the appeal are as under.2. Guest Keen Williams Ltd. ('Company' for short) is a Company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1913, with the liability of its members limited by shares, having its registered office at 3-A Shakespeare Sarani, Calcutta and carries on business at, amongst other places, Andul Road, Howrah where it has one of its factories. The Company is engaged in the business of, amongst others, manufacture of iron and steel materials. The Company is managed and controlled by a Board of Directors, which include two nominee Directors, one...
Mrs. R.S. Agha Vs. Sk. Ainul Hoq
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-17-1989
Reported in: (1989)2CALLT25(HC)
L.M. Ghosh, J.1. On the grounds of default and subletting, the plaintiff filed the suit for ejectment against the principal defendant, Mrs. R. S. Agha. Her brother, Shri S. Mukherjee was made a proforma defendant. The allegation of the plaintiff was that the defendant was a habitual defaulter and had not paid any rent since the month of March, 1972. The other allegation was that after the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act came into force, the defendant sublet and/or transferred and/or assigned the entire suite No. 2 to the proforma defendant, the said Samir Mukherjee. Then there was usual averment regarding the valid service of notice Under Section 13(6) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act.2. The defendants filed separate written statements. The defendant No. 1 denied that she was defaulter or that she had sublet, In paragraph 10 of the written statement of the defendant No. 1, it was made out that the defendant had been living, with her parents, brother and sisters jointly and in t...
Ashok Roy and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-17-1989
Reported in: (1989)2CALLT139(HC)
Khawaja Mohammad Yusuf, J.1. The petitioners pursuant to an advertisement applied for the post of Teachers in different Primary Schools in urban area in the district of 24-Parganas and they were duly selected for the interview. The petitioners appeared before the Interview Board and empanelled in 1981 as qualified candidates for the Primary School Teachers in Serial Nos. 26, 6, 84 and 36 respectively. Since then the selected candidates were absorbed in the post of the Teachers only not serially from the panel but even from outside the panel. The petitioners came to know in July 1986 that fresh recruitment for the post of Primary Teachers through different Employment Exchanges in the urban area within the district is going to be made. The case of the petitioners is that the preparation of the new panel amounts to virtual cancellation of old panel of 1981 to the prejudice of the petitioners. The writ petitioners had referred to a judgment delivered by me on 12th August, 1987 in CO. No. 1...
Brooke Bond India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-17-1989
Reported in: (1992)95CTR(Cal)89,[1992]193ITR390(Cal)
SUHAS CHANDRA SEN J. - The Tribunal has referred the following two questions of law under section 256 (1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in disallowing the claim for weighted deduction under section 35B on the following items :Rs.(i) Packing credit interest 20,73,537(ii) Post-due/overdue interest on export 8,24,280(iii) Bank charges including cost of remittance 4,06,141(iv) Exchange losses in export 19,965(v) Freight and insurance 1,05,76,274(vi) Packing and handling 92,87,092(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in disallowing the claim for deduction of tax under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, in computing the assessees total income ?'The relevant assessment year is 1975-76 (accounting year ended on 29th June, 1974)The first question relates to weighted deduction claimed by the asses-see. Since there are as many as six items in respect of wh...
Sisir Rudra Vs. Sunil Rudra
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-16-1989
Reported in: (1989)1CALLT327(HC)
A.K. Chatterjee, J.1. A dispute between two brothers over a business carried on in a shop room at 30/1. K. L. Burman Road within Golabari P.S. District Howrah under the name and style of Messrs. Bhupati Bhusan Rudra & Grand Son formerly belonging to their father, since deceased, gave rise to a proceeding under Section 144, Cr. P.C. drawn up on the 20th April 1988, which was challenged in this Court, being Criminal Revision 517 of 1988, by one of the brothers namely, the present opposite party No. 1 before Mukul Gopal Mukherjee, J. The learned Judge disposed of the application on 3.5.88 holding that no interference at that stage was called for but liberty was given to make an application before the Learned Magistrate for conversion of the proceeding to one under Section 145, Cr. P.C. Accordingly at the instance of the said opposite party the Learned Magistrate converted the proceeding and called upon the parties to file written statement by an Order made on the 15th June 1988. The other...
Samar Ghosh and ors. Vs. Somnath Chakraborty and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-15-1989
Reported in: 1989CriLJ1638
Mukul Gopal Mukherji, J.1. The present proceeding in Contempt has been initiated on the basis of a petition filed by Samar Ghosh and 16 others, all Advocates practising in the Judges' Court, Chinsurah, for an alleged contumacious conduct committed by the contemnor opposite party No. 1 Somnath Chakraborty, Sub-Inspector of Police who wrote out a poem' Kazir Bichar' which was published in a Bengali fortnightly magazine 'Bhagirathi Express' on 16th Dec., 1985. It was contended that the contemnor opposite party No. 2 Pradeep Mukherjee who is die editor and publisher of the said magazine 'Bhagirathi Express' also was guilty of contumacious conduct as editor and publisher of the said fortnightly ' Bhagirathi Express' by publishing the same in the issue of said magazine 'Bhagirathi Express' dt. 16th Dec., 1985 thereby scandalising the court and the lawyers and lowering UK dignity of the judicial system, as such, which amounted to an interference with the judicial process as well as administra...
Ram Gopal Agarwala Vs. Dr. S.N. Mitra
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-15-1989
Reported in: 1989CriLJ1337
Pabitra Kumar Banerjee, J.1. On 10-12-70 Dr. S. N. Mitra, Food Inspector, Corporation of Calcutta visited the grocery shop of accused Ramgopal Agarwal at 8/1, Balmukund Makkar Road, Calcutta and suspecting the stock of Haldi Powder kept and exposed for sale in the said hop to be adulterated he after service of the requisite notice, purchased 450 grams of Haldi Powder from the accused-shopkeeper on Cash payment. Dr. Mitra divided the sample powder into three equal part, put each part into empty glass phial and sealed all the phials in presence of witness C. W .3, One such phial was handed over to the accused, the other was kept by the Food Inspector himself and the last one was sent to the Public Analyst for testing whether there was any adulteration. The Public Analyst carried out the analysis and sent the certificate Ext. 5 in due course which was followed by launching of prosecution on 5471 at the instance of the Food Inspector against the accused. The sample containing the Haldi Pow...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jessop and Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-1989
Reported in: [1990]181ITR358(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J.1. The following two questions have been referred to this court under Section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 :'(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the question whether the loss on sale of 3,25,000 shares of British India Corporation was a revenue loss is dependent on the suit pending in the High Court between the assessee and Sohanlal and Co. and that if the judgment in the said pending suit shows that the transactions in British India Corporation shares were real, the loss claimed amounting to Rs. 3,82,278 will have to be allowed as a revenue loss ? (ii) Whether, on a consideration of the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal should have held that even assuming that the said British India Corporation shares were sold to Sohanlal andCo., the loss arising therefrom was not a trading loss ?' 2. In this case, the dispute relates to certain transactions of shares of...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Saroj Kumar Banerjee (Through Legal Rep ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-1989
Reported in: [1990]181ITR168(Cal)
S.C. Sen, J. 1. It has been stated by the advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee that the assessee, Shri Saroj Kumar Banerjee, has died leaving his son, Manoj Kumar Banerjee, as his legal heir and representative. The name of the son be recorded.2. The question that has been referred to us by the Tribunal under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ('the Act'), is as under :'Whether, on the facets and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessee was entitled to deduction under Section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in respect of the house at Hindusthan Road, Calcutta, belonging to his wife ?'3. The assessments relate to the assessment years 1970-71 to 1974-75. For the assessment year 1970-71, the Wealth-tax Officer had included the sum of Rs. 1,67,750, as the value of the house property at Hindusthan Road, Calcutta, standing in the name of the assessee's wife. For the assessment year 1974-75, Rs. 1,70,000 was added as the value...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »