1
Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jun-18-1976
Reported in : [1978]112ITR111(Cal)
..... section 269 of the income-tax act which was invoked by the said authority had no application. it was pointed out that the pre-requisite condition for assumption of jurisdiction by the said authorities were not satisfied in this case.4. it was further pointed out to the said authority that the rights and obligations of the previous agreement dated 30th december, 1947, entered into between the said hindusthan building society ltd. and the said hindusthan co-operative insurance society ltd. devolved on the life insurance corporation of india upon nationalisation of the insurance business in terms of the said life insurance act, 1956 ..... asst. government of indiacommissioner of office of the......income-tax, acquisition dated 18-6-73range-ii, calcutta. 2. whereas, i, m. n. tiwary, being the competent authority under section 269b of the income-tax act, 1961 (43 of 1961), have reason to believe that the immovable property, having a fair market value exceeding rs. 25,000 and bearing no. 29/na (e.p. & w.p ..... acquisition of the aforesaid property in terms of chapter xxa of the income-tax act, 1961 (43 of 1961), have been recorded by me;now, therefore, in pursuance of section 269c, i hereby initiate proceedings for the acquisition of the aforesaid property by the issue of thisnotice under sub-section (1) of section 269d of the income-tax act, 1961 (43 of 1961), to the following persons, namely-(i) m/s. life insurance corporation of india, (ii) m/s. hindusthan building society ltd. (confirming .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Oct-29-1976
Reported in : AIR1976SC308; (1976)4SCC622; [1977]1SCR1017; 1976(8)LC956(SC)
..... fixed the annual value at rs. 43,405.20. he held that, in view of the 'non-obstante' clause in section 138 (b) of the madhya pradesh municipal corporation act, 1956, hereinafter referred to as the act, there was no justification for the argument that the rental value of the premises could not be fixed at a rate higher than the standard rent under section 7 of the madhya pradesh accommodation control act, 1961. an appeal was taken to the second additional district judge, but without success. the respondents then filed an application for revision, which was allowed by the impugned judgment of the high ..... in spite of the non-obstante clause and to limit the annual value to any standard rent that the building might fetch under that act.7. we have also gone through corporation of calcutta v. life insurance .corporation of india (supra). that was also a case where the premises had been let out on rent. the standard rent had also been fixed, and that was why padma debi's case (supra) was held to be applicable.8. so also, guntur municipal council v. guntur town rate payers' association (supra) was a case where the premises were on rent and there also .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jan-21-1976
Reported in : ILR1976KAR800; 1976(1)KarLJ289
ORDER1. The petitioner is a Development Officer in the Life Insurance Corporation of India ('the Corporation'). Before the Corporation was formed, he was employed in the Hindustan Co-operative Insurance Company Ltd., While joining service, he had given his date of birth as '6-2-1916'. The service records maintained by his employer were forwarded to the Corporation when his services were taken over by the latter. Now, it has been notified that he shall retire on attaining the age of superannuation at 60 years. That date is not far off. It falls on 6-2-1976. The petitioner challenges the said Notification by contending that the Corporation has failed to record his correct date of birth as 15-6-1917.2. The dispute arose in this way:By letter dated 14-9-1968, 17-9-1968, the Corporation asked the petitioner to submit the school or college certificate in proof of his age and educational qualification. A reminder was issued on 16-10-1968 to the same effect. Thereafter, the petitioner produced...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jan-22-1976
Reported in : (1977)IILLJ285Cal
Amarendra Nath Sen, J.1. An interesting question of some importance concerning the rights and obligations of the Management and the Award Staff of a nationalized Bank arises for consideration in this writ petition.2. Six employees of Bank of India, a nationalized Bank, (hereinafter referred to as the Bank), and Bank of India Employees' Union, the recognized union of the Bank, have presented this writ petition in which the validity of two orders or notices passed by the Management of the Bank have been questioned. The first order or notice dated 25.6.1975 is contained in Annexure ('A') to the petition and is in the following terms:NOTICEDeduction of pro rata wages for mass demonstration.Certain members of award staff of Calcutta Branch and Regional Offices held mass demonstrations on the following days leaving their respective desks: Date Time3.6.1975 2-30 p.m. to 4.30 a.m. 2 hours4.6.1975 11-10 a.m. to 11-35 a.m. 25 minutes6.6.1975 2-30 p.m. to 3-00 p.m. 30 minutes17.6.1975 2-45 p.m. t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-06-1976
Reported in : AIR1976Delhi256; 12(1976)DLT209; 1976RLR271
1. Pritam Lal, appellant, is a tenant of a house owned by the respondent landlady Shrimati Anand Kaur. The agreed rate of rent was Rs. 15/- per month. The tenant did not pay rent from June 1, 1973 to May 31, 1974.2. On 6-6-1974, the landlady brought an eviction case against the tenant. The sole ground on which the ejectment of the tenant was sought was non-payment of rent. In the ejectment petition it was said that the tenant had committed default once in the past and as a result of which an application for his eviction was filed and the Court made an order under Section 15(1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (the Act) directing him to deposit rent which he did. The default in the payment of rent from June 1973 to May 1974 was said to be a second default.3. Before the petition was filed by the landlady on December 14, 1973, she served a notice on the tenant. In the notice she wrote to the tenant as follows:-Registered A. D.From Shrimati Anand Kaur,E-130, Kalkaji Colony, New Delhi-19.Dated...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Feb-12-1976
Reported in : AIR1978Guj13; (1977)GLR424
1. The plaintiffs appellants filed Civil Suit No. 2736 of 1975 in the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad on Sept. 10, 1975 claiming a permanent injunction against the defendants respondents restraining them from exhibiting the cinematographic picture named 'Jai Santoshl Maa'. Defendant-respondent No. 1 is a name and style of business carried on by defendant-respondent No. 2, who had produced the said movie. Defendant-respondent No. 3 is the Director of the movie and defendant respondent No. 4 had written the Them thereof Defendant-respondent No. 5 is the distributor and defendants-respondents Nos. 6 to 14 are the theatres wherein the aforesaid movie was exhibited in the City of Ahmedabad After filing of the suit the plaintiffs to* out a notice of motion for a temporary injunction restraining the exhibition of the movie by the defendants. On notice being given to the defendants, they appeared and showed cause. After hearing both the parties the learned City Civil Judge discharged the rule on t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Feb-13-1976
Reported in : [1977]107ITR133(Guj)
B.J. Divan, C.J.1. The assessee in both these cases is the same and the assessment years are different, viz., in Income-tax Reference No. 125 of 1974, the assessment year is 1965-66, whereas in Income-tax Reference No. 181 of 1974, the assessment year under reference is 1966-67. 2. The common question which is involved in both these cases in also the same. But in each of these two reference one additional question besides the common question has also been referred to us for our opinion. Since the common question which arises in both these mattes is the question of major importance, we will dispose of both these matters by this common judgment. 3. In Income-tax Reference No. 125 of 1974, at the instance of the revenue, the following questions has been referred to us for our opinio : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the one-fifth of the expenditure incurred by the assessee for purchase of drawings, designs and pa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-21-1976
Reported in : AIR1976MP164
G.P. Singh, J. For himself and S.M.N. Raina J. 1. This order shall also dispose of Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 191 of 1971 and Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 16 of 1972.2. The facts leading to these appeals are that a motor vehicle bearing registration number MPJ 9132 was involved in an accident on 3rd June 1965 at Nainpur in which one Babulal died. Babulal's widow and son, namely, Radhabai and Ravishankar, applied to the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal for award of compensation. The Tribunal by its award, dated 18th September 1971, has allowed the claim for compensation to the extent of Rs. 9,486/-. Interest from the date of the claim petition upto payment at the rate of 4% per annum has also been allowed. All these appeals have been filed against the award.3. The facts found are that the vehicle involved in the accident belonged to the State and that at the relevant time it was allotted to the Primary Health Centre, Nainpur. At about 10 P.M., one Satyanarayan approached Dr. Tiwari...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Feb-23-1976
Reported in : (1977)IILLJ409Guj
J.B. Mehta, J.1. The petitioner-agent, who had been serving at Santh Piply Branch, Nadiad, having been dismissed by the order, dated June 5, 1974, communicated on June 10, 1974 at Annexure E, challenges the said order in this petition. The petitioner had joined the service of the original Bank of Baroda in the year 1958 as a clerk. He was promoted as an officer and was appointed as an agent at Santh Piply Branch of the Bank of Baroda at Nadiad. In the course of duties he had purchased some foreign bills (travellers' cheques) at the Santh Piply Branch at Nadiad aggregating to a sum of Rs. 25,000. These bills had come in his possession on behalf of his Bank. He had deposited the amount of the foreign bills in the main branch at Baroda. On enquiry it was found that this was highly irregular and improper and the petitioner's explanation in this connection was, therefore sought by the letter, dated May 28, 1973, at Annexure A for ascertaining the full facts. The petitioner had addressed a l...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-27-1976
Reported in : 12(1976)DLT195; 1976RLR414
B.G. Misra, J. (1) This second appeal under section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 59 of 1958, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), has been filed by the tenant against the appellate order of the Rent Control Tribunal dated 19th September, 1973, by which it has dismissed the appeal and affirmed the order of the Controller, dated 4th May, 1973, finally ordering eviction of the tenant appellant on the ground of non-payment of rent mentioned in clause (a) of the proviso to subsection (1) of section 14 of the Act, read with section 14(2). (2) The material facts of the case are that the appellant is a tenant in respect of premises at East Patel Nagar, on a rent of Rs. 3 5.00 per month. On the previous occasion he fell into arrears of rent and a petition for his eviction on the ground of non-payment of rent was instituted. This was disposed of by order of the Controller dated 19th August, 1960 (certified copy of which is Ex. A2 on the file). A detailed reference to this order will be m...
Tag this Judgment!