Kolkata Court March 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.
Nripendra Kumar Ghosh Vs. Registrar of Companies and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-21-1984
Reported in: [1985]58CompCas672(Cal),88CWN850
Umesh Chandra Banerjee, J. 1. This application arises out of complaints filed by the Registrar of Companies, being Case Nos. C/2083/82, C/2085/82, C/2103/82, C/2112/82, C/2138/82, C/2146/82, C/2151/82 and C/2163/82 in the Court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. While some of the proceedings were commenced on an allegation that the accused persons have not filed the annual return up to September 30, 1977, to the office of the complainant though the same ought to have been filed with the complainant on or before November 28, 1977, and the default alleged is the non-compliance with the provisions of Sections 159 and 162 of the Companies Act, 1956, the other proceedings were commenced for non-compliance of Section 220(1) of the Companies Act.2. In this writ petition, the petitioner prays for quashing of the proceedings and canvasses in support of the application, only the bar of limitation.3. Before adverting to the question of limitation, the relevant provisions of the Companies Act s...
Benimadhab Mahrotra Vs. Howrah Flour Mills Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-20-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Cal172,89CWN77
Anil, K. Sen, J.1. These are two revision petitions preferred by Beni Madhab Mahrotra carrying on business under the name and style of Mahrotra Industries as the sole proprietor thereof at premises Nos. 33, 34, and 34/1, Benbehari Bose Road, Howrah. Orders challenged are both dt. Dec. 13, 1983, passed by the learned Assistant District Judge, 1st. Court, Howrah, in Title Suit No. 75 of 1981 and Title Suit No. 80 of 1981. By the orders impugned, the learned Assistant District Judge has dismissed the two applications under Order 1 Rule 10 of the C.P.C. preferred by the petitioner respectively in the two suits for being added as party defendant. The applications are being heard on notice to and on contest by the plaintiff who is the same in both the two suits, namely, Howrah Flour Mill. Since the claim of the petitioner for being added as party defendant in the two suits does not stand on identical grounds it would be necessary for us to deal with the two cases separately.2. Title Suit No....
Bikash Ch. Mondal Vs. Sasanta Mondal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-20-1984
Reported in: 1984CriLJ1191
Sankari Prasad Das Ghosh, J.1. Susanta Mondal, the opposite party No. 1 before us, stood charged along with four other accused persons, Sm. Hiranmoyee Mondal, Sm. Sabitri Mondal, Sm. Purnima Mondal and Upendra Nath Misra under Section 302/34 I.P.C. for committing murder of one Kalipada Mondal on 29.12.78 at village Nishindra under P.S. Farakka, in furtherance of their common intention. They also stood charged under Section 323/34 I.P.C. for voluntarily causing hurt to one Binod Tanti at the same place and at the same time, in furtherance of their common intention. Ten prosecution witnesses were examined in the case. After considering the evidences of the P.Ws. and the materials on record, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fourth Court, Murshidabad found the opposite party No. 1 and the other four accused persons not guilty under Section 302/34 I.P.C. Instead, the learned Additional Sessions Judge found the opposite party No. 1 guilty under Section 304 Part II I.P.C. for causing th...
Bhulan Shaw Vs. Sm. Tarubala Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Cal450
Amitabha Dutta, J. 1. This is an appeal by thedefendant from the judgment and decree ofthe learned District Judge, Hooghly reversingthe decision of the learned Munsif 1st Court,Serampore and it arises out of a suit for evictionof the defendant from one room in plot No. 153of village Kashibati within Mouza Uttarpara,P. S. Uttarpara in the District of Hooghly afterservice of a notice of ejectment.2. The plaintiff's case, is that the defendant was a tenant under the plaintiff in the suit premises at a rent of Rs. 32/- per month payable according to English calendar month and that as the plaintiff requires the disputed room for her own use and occupation, she served a notice of ejectment on the defendant dated 28-12-1973 by registered post on 31-12-1973 terminating the tenancy and calling upon the defendant to vacate the suit premises on the expiry of the month of January, 1974.3. The defendant contested the suit by filing written statement denying the validity andsufficiency of the notice...
Titagarh Paper Mills Co. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and or ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-1984
Reported in: [1986]59CompCas94(Cal),88CWN650
G.N. Ray, J. 1. On this writ petition, no rule has been issued but the petition has been directed to be heard as a contested application upon notice to the respondents and such notice has been served and the respondents including respondent No. 5, Sri Amal Chandra Chakraborty, have entered appearance and contested the writ petition. This writ petition is directed against the order of the Government of India dated August 10, 1977, under Clause (b) of Section 237 of the Companies Act, 1956, and notification of the Government of India in the Department of Company Affairs, No. G.S.R. 443(E), dated October 18, 1972, and the decision of the Company Law Board to appoint an inspector to investigate into the affairs of the company and to report thereon and also against appointment of respondent No. 5, Sri Amal Chandra Chakraborty, chartered accountant of M/s. S. R. Batliboi & Co., to carry on the investigation and report to the Company Law Board and also against the report submitted by the said...
Sanatan Ganguly Vs. State and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-1984
Reported in: [1984]56CompCas93(Cal),88CWN781
Monoj Kumar Kukherjee, J. 1. The Assistant Registrar of Companies, West Bengal, filed a complaint against the four directors of Ganguly Traders (P) Ltd. of 7, Bipin Behari Ganguli Street, Calcutta, in the court of the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta, alleging commission of an offence under Section 210(5) of the Companies Act, 1956, hereinafter referred to as ' the Act', By his order, dated November 3, 1978, the learned Magistrate took cognizance upon the same, issued process against the accused and transferred the case to the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 11th Court, Calcutta, for disposal. After entering appearance, one of the accused, Sri Sanatan Ganguly, filed an application under Section 633(1) of the Act for being relieved of his liability, as a director of the company, in respect of the offence alleged against him. In his application he contended, inter alia, that the other directors were inimically disposed towards him and in spite of his best efforts he could...
Duncan Agro Industries Ltd. Vs. Central Board of Excise and Customs
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-1984
Reported in: 1985(22)ELT770(Cal)
A.K. Sen Gupta, J.1. National Tobacco Company of India Limited moved this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the legality and validity of a notice dated 14th April, 1975, issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs (hereinafter referred to as the Board) under Section 35A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). During the pendency of the present proceeding, the said National Tobacco Company of India Limited was amalgamated with Duncan Agro Industries Limited (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner) whose name has been substituted in place and stead of National Tobacco Company of India Limited.2. The petitioner has its factory situated 'at Agarpara in the District of 24 Parganas (West Bengal) and at Biccavollu in the District of Godavari (Andhra Pradesh). At the material time (20th January, 1972, to 19th January, 1973), the petitioner used to carry on business, inter alia, of manufacture of cigarett...
Duncan Agro Industries Ltd. Vs. J. Banerjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-16-1984
Reported in: 1984(2)ECC241,1987(30)ELT231(Cal)
Ajit Kumar Sengupta, J.1. National Tobacco Company of India Limited moved this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the legality and validity of a notice dated 14th April, 1975 issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs (hereinafter referred to as the Board) under Section 35A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). During the pendency of the present proceeding, the said National Tobacco Company of India Limited was amalgamated with Duncan Agro Industries Limited (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner) whose name has been substituted in place and stead of National Tobacco Company of India Limited.2. The petitioner has its factory situated at Agarpara in the District of 24 Parganas (West Bengal) and at Biccavollu in the District of Godavari (Andhra Pradesh). At the material time (January 20, 1972 to January 19, 1973), the petitioner used to carry on business, inter alia, of manufacture of cigarettes...
Shyam Roy Vs. Grindlays Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-15-1984
Reported in: [1984]56CompCas371(Cal),[1984]150ITR263(Cal)
Sachindra Nath Sanyal, J.1. In this application under Section 115 of the CPC, the plaintiff has challenged the judgment of the learned Additional District Judge, Fourth Court, Alipore, dated January 26, 1983, dismissing and vacating the order passed in the miscellaneous appeal oh July 21, 1082, for preservation of the status quo. 2. The plaintiff instituted the suit on June 17, 1982, for a declaration that the auction sale held on March 21, 1980 and confirmed oil May 6, 1980, in Money Execution Case No. 2 of 1978, in the Court of the First Subordinate Judge, Alipore, in respect of the suit property was null and void. The plaintiff also prayed for permanent injunction restraining, the defendants from transferring, assigning, encumbering and/or changing the nature and character of the suit property and front disturbing the enjoyment and possession of the plaintiff in respect of the suit property and from disconnecting electric supply, water supply, etc. The plaintiff also prayed for perm...
Union Carbide (India) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Collector of Central Excise
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-15-1984
Reported in: 1985(22)ELT729(Cal)
Samir Kumar Mukherjee, J.1. Union Carbide (India) Ltd., the petitioner in the present rule, has challenged the order dated 17th April, 1976, signed on 29th April, 1976, passed by the Assistant Collector of Customs, inter alia, directing the petitioner to submit price list without any deduction from the uniform selling price on account of transport charges. The petitioner has also assailed letters dated 9th October, 1975, of the Assistant Collector approving price lists subject to inclusion of costs of wooden packages and those dated 10th May, 1976, issued by the Superintendent of Central Excise, respondent No. 2, returning the price lists, submitted by the petitioner, for resubmission after necessary revisions in the light of the aforesaid order. The reliefs which the petitioner has asked for, are for issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus for rescission, cancellation, withdrawal and/or quashing of the aforesaid order and letters dated 9th October, 1975, and 10th May...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »