Kolkata Court March 1991 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.
Mrs. Maria Desilva Vs. AustIn Desilva
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-18-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Cal309,II(1991)DMC313
ORDERBhagabati ProsadBanerjee, J. 1.This case has been forwarded by the trial Court for confirmation of the decree nisi for dissolution of the marriage under Section 17 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869. Notice could not be served as the husband has expired. The question in this case is whether the divorce suit abates after the decree nisi was passed under Section 16 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and during the pendency of the matter before the High Court for confirmation under Section 17 of the Act the husband has died.2. In this case the suit for dissolution was filed by the wife against the husband in Divorce Suit No. 94 of 1986 before the Court of the 11th Additional District Judge, Alipor and the learned District Judge at the first instance passed a decree, nisi dissolving the marriage on the basis of an application under Section 10 of the said Act on the ground ofadultery with desertion and adultery with cruelty.3. When the matter came up...
Endogram Tea Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-18-1991
Reported in: [1993]203ITR511(Cal)
Shyamal Kumar Sen, J.1. In this application under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following questions have been referred to this court for determination :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that payment of Rs. 10 lakhs to Messrs. Octavius Steel and Co. Ltd. under the agreement dated March 10, 1983, was capital in nature and hence was not admissible as a revenue expenditure ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the disallowance of litigation expenses of Rs. 1,05,019 claimed by the assessee as revenue expenditure ?'2. The facts leading to the reference, inter alia, are that the year of assessment involved is 1982-83. The assessee is a non-resident company having its head office in the U. K. and was carrying on the business of cultivation and manufacture of tea in India and sale thereof in and outside India. It has no other branch in any ot...
Sampatraj Pagaria Vs. Delta International Ltd. and Another
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-15-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Cal153
ORDER1. This is an application for rejection of the plaint and for stay of all further proceedings in suit No. 691 of 1989 (Sampatraj Pagaria v. Delta International Pvt. Ltd. and another). It is the case of the petitioner that by and under a registered indenture of lease dated July 10, 1977 the predecessor in interest of the petitioner, the Council House Properties Pvt. Ltd., demised unto the predecessor in interest of the respondent No. 2, the Eagle Star Insurance Company Ltd., the entirety of the third, fourth, fifth and sixth floor of the premises No. 4, Government Place (North) 'Eagle House', Calcutta for a term of 21 years commencing on and from June 14, 1967 at and for a monthly rental of Rs. 10,770.30 p. and service charges of Rs. 7,180.20 p. on terms and conditions mentioned in the said lease. Council House Properties Pvt. Ltd. Was amalgamated with the petitioner by an order passed by this court in company proceeding, as a result whereof all the right, title and interest of the...
Dilip Kumar Jaiswal Vs. Debapriya Banerjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-1991
Reported in: [1992]73CompCas434(Cal),96CWN90
Mallick, J. 1. The petitioner who is accused No. 2 in the Case No. C/374 of 1989 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, as amended by the Banking, Public Financial Institutions and Negotiable Instruments Laws (Amendment) Act, 1988, now pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 5th Court, Calcutta, has moved this court under Section 401, read with Section 482, of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, for quashing the said proceeding against him on the following allegations. On November 15, 1989, the opposite party being the Director (Commercial) of M/s. T. S. Foundry Equipment Pvt. Ltd. having its registered office at 2, Ganesh Chandra Avenue, filed a petition of complaint before the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta, charging the petitioner with an offence punishable under Section 138, as amended by the Banking. Public Financial Institutions and Negotiable Instruments Laws (Amendment) Act, 1988. In the aforesaid complaint, it was, int...
Harendra Nath Ghosal Vs. Superfoam Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-1991
Reported in: [1992]74CompCas740(Cal),95CWN888
M.R. Mallick, J.1. This revision petition under Section 115, Civil Procedure Code, is directed against the order dated January 8, 1990, passed by the Additional District Judge, 8th Court, Alipore, in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 421 of 1988 arising out of Miscellaneous Case No. 44 of 1985 disposed of by the Assistant District Judge, 4th Court, Alipore. Facts may be briefly stated as follows :2. The present petitioner as plaintiff filed T. S. No. 13 of 1985 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, 4th Court, Alipore, for eviction of the opposite party tenant on the ground of reasonable requirement and also on the ground of damaging a portion of the premises in suit. Summons was sought to be served upon the present opposite party both through the bailiff as well as by registered post. As the summons of the suit was sent under registered post to the address of the tenanted premises and as the envelope came with the endorsement 'refused' and as the opposite party did not appear to contest the su...
Calcutta Electric Supply Corporation (India) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Offic ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-1991
Reported in: [1992]197ITR563(Cal)
Ajoy Nath Roy, J.1. This is an application under article 226 of the Constitution of India directed against a portion of the order dated August 4, 1978, passed by the Income-tax Officer, 'C' Ward, Company District-1. The objection is raised only with regard to the sum of Rs. 5,80,705 which, in that order, is declared to be the interest under Section 214 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. The case of the writ petitioner is that the original assessment for the assessment year 1970-71 was made by an order dated March 30, 1973. Thereafter the same was set aside on revision on September 25, 1973. A fresh assessment was made on January 25, 1975. A prayer for rectification was also made to the Income-tax Officer. Further, an appeal from the assessment was heard and disposed of on April 28, 1978. The order dated August 4, 1978, which I have mentioned in the beginning, gives effect to the decision in the appeal.3. From page 37 of the annexures to the writ petition it would appear that this same sum ...
Estate of Jaydayal Lohia Vs. Controller of Estate Duty
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-1991
Reported in: [1992]195ITR268(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J. 1. In this reference under Section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, the following question of law has been referred to this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessment made under Section 58(3) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, was time-barred within the meaning of Section 73A of the said Act?'2. The facts leading to this reference are stated hereinafter :Shri Jaydayal Lohia, the deceased herein, died on August 16, 1971. Estate duty return was filed by the accountable person on October 7, 1976. An application was made on September 12, 1979, for grant of certificate under Section 57(2) of the Act even though no application was made to any court whatsoever by the accountable person or by anybody also for grant of representation and/or succession certificate in the matter of the estate of the said deceased.3. When a plea was taken before' the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty that the assessment of estate duty could not be made i...
Mangila Bibi Vs. Noor HossaIn and Another
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Cal92
ORDER1. Stripped of unnecessary detail the petitioner Monjila Bibi was admittedly married with the opposite party No. 1 Noor Hossain on the 6th March, 1986, according to Muslim Rights when a Kabinnama was executed. She contended that after the marriage she came to know that the said opposite party was not a medical graduate as represented before the marriage and further, she was ill-treated at her husband's place and ultimately driven away. In this situation, she dissolved the marriage by virtue of the authority delegated to her by her husband as recorded in the Kabinnama and executed a divorce deed before the Muslim Marriage Registrar and Kazi on the 27th February, 1988. The divorce was communicated to the said opposite party but as he did not pay any maintenance and dower and other properties given to her at the time of marriage as noted in the Kabinnama, she made an application under Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, before a competent Magist...
Dewasa Trading Vs. Collector of Customs (Preventive)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1991
Reported in: 1992(59)ELT519(Cal)
Ruma Pal, J.1. This writ application was moved in September 1987. Directions for filing of affidavits was given on 14th September 1987. No. affidavit-in-opposition has been filed by the respondents. I, therefore, proceed on the basis that the facts as stated in the writ petition are admitted. The facts are as follow -The petitioner carries on business in Singapore. The petitioner manufactures and deals in Video Magnetic Tapes, components of video cassettes etc. In 1985 an agreement was entered into between M/s. Chinar Electronics and the petitioner under which the petitioner agreed to sell and deliver video magnetic pancakes and video cassettes without spools (hereinafter referred to as the said goods) to one M/s. Chinar Electronics. Payment for the said goods was to be made by negotiation through the bank of M/s. Chinar Electronics i.e., VYSYA Bank.2. Pursuant to the agreement, the petitioner shipped the said goods to Calcutta. The documents of title were forwarded by the petitioner t...
Smt. Veena Devi Singhania Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1991
Reported in: [1994]210ITR967(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J. 1. In this reference under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, the following questions of law have been referred to this court, for the assessment years 1978-79, 1979-80 and 1980-81, at the instance of the assessee :Common questions in R. A. No. 118(Cal) of 1987 and R. A. Nos. 119 and 134(Cal) of 1987 : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was not entitled to deduction of the estimated notional amount of capital gains tax 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the compulsory deposit in the Compulsory Deposit Scheme (Income-tax Payers) Account under the Compulsory Deposit Scheme (Income-tax Payers) Act, 1974, was to be taken into consideration in computing the net wealth of the assessee ?' 2. There is an additional question in R. A. Nos. 119 and 134/(Cal) of 1987, which is as follows :'3. Whether, on the facts and ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »