Kolkata Court January 1987 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.
Bharat Shivji Sethia and anr. Vs. State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-30-1987
Reported in: 1988(15)ECC197
Sankar Battacharyya , J.1. This revisional application raises an important question of law.2. Bharat Shivji Sethia and Madhusudhan Deb Chand Sethia, the two petitioners before us, were tried before a learned Metropolitan Magistrate on the following charges:Madhusudhan Deb Chand Sethia.That you on or about dated 15-12-1959 contravened the condition of the Customs Clearance Permit and the Bond and purchased or otherwise acquired from Sri Nicholas Nesekar the said Daimler Benz Mercedes Car bearing Registration No. WBE 5973 and the terms and conditions of the said Customs Clearance Permit as well as of the Bond were known to you from before and thereby committed an offence punishable under Sections 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947 and within my cognizance.Bharat Shivji Sethia.That you on or about dated 15-12-1959 contravened the condition of the Customs Clearance Permit and the Bond and purchased or otherwise acquired from Sri Nicholas Nesekar the said Daimler Benz Mercedes...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. S.H. MumtazuddIn and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-1987
Reported in: 1988(16)ECC152
1. This appeal is directed against a Judgment and Order of acquittal passed by Shri S. Pratihar, Metropolitan Magistrate, Fourth Court, Calcutta in Case No. C/2125 of 1977.2. What happened in that case was that one Mirajuddin (accused-respondent No. 3) and his son Ferozuddin (accused-respondent No. 4) were found sitting within their shop at 4, Radhabazar Street, Calcutta on 7-1-1974. The place was visited by Sri Debabrata Ghosh, Inspector of Customs & Central Excise being assisted by Sri Bimal Kumar Banerjee (P.S. 4), Inspector of Customs & Central Excise. P.W. 6 Sri D.N. Ghose, another Inspector of Customs and P.W. 7 Sri M.R. Roy, still another Inspector were all there at that time and place to witness the search. In the presence of all these persons a cardboard box containing 88 pieces of foreign-made wrist-watches were found out at that place and on that very date accused Mirajuddin gave a written statement wherein he stated in clear terms that he had no conscious knowledge of the c...
Mahal Chand Sikwal Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-1987
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1569
Monoranjan Mallick, J.1. This is an application under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashed; the proceeding of Case No. C/66/86 under Section 403 of the Penal Code pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 11th Court, Calcutta. The facts are briefly as follows : -2. The opposite party No. 2 as complainant filed a petition of complaint before the learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta on Feb. 22, 1986 against the present petitioner along with two others, inter alia, on the ground that the complainant and the accused petitioner along with other brothers started a partnership business in the year 1966 and the complainant opposite party regularly participated in the business up to 1978, but thereafter the complainant opposite party became sick and went to his native place, but when he came back in the month of Sep., 1985, he found that name of the partnership business has been changed and the petitioner has been running the said bu...
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Vs. Jeet Singh Paul
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-19-1987
Reported in: (1987)0CALLT52(HC)
ORDERNirendra Krishna Mitra, J.1. None appears for the opposite party inspite of service of notice upon him. opposite party No. 1 was an Officer Trainee of the petitioner's Company and he was posted at its Siliguri Installation at New Jalpaiguri. The Regional Manager of the petitioner company having his office at Calcutta, terminated his service allegedly without assigning any reason. The opposite party No. 1 filed a suit being O. C. Suit No. 7 of 1980 in the Court of the learned Munsif at Jalpaiguri against the petitioner and the opposite parties Nos. 2 and 3 praying inter alia, for a declaration that the order of termination passed by the Regional Operation Manager of the petitioner-company vide letter No. P & A/1121/135, dated February 15, 1977 was wholly mala fide and without jurisdiction, for a declaration that the opposite party No. 1 was still in service under the petitioner company and also for damages. A preliminary objection was raised by the petitioner company regarding the ...
National Insulated Cable Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-1987
Reported in: 1987(12)ECC407,1987(28)ELT248(Cal)
Sudhir Ranjan Roy, J.1. The only question which invites this Court's attention in these two Rules which are taken up for analogous hearing-and disposal is whether Hypalon-40, a chemical compound which is used in the manufacturing of electric cables, is Synthetic Rubber or Synthetic Resin for its proper classification under the appropriate heading of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 for the purpose of the assessment of Customs duty.2. The petitioner No. 1 in both the Rules is the National Insulated Cable Company of India Limited. The Company has its factory at Shyam-nagar, 24-Parganas, West Bengal arid its registered office is at Nicco House, Hare Street, Calcutta-1. The petitioner No. 1 is carrying on business of manufacturing various types of electrical cables and wires and for the said purpose has to import amongst other Synthetic Rubber Sold under the trade name of Hypalon-40, which is used for insulating wires and cables. The said Hypalon is manufactured by only one concern in the worl...
Bilaspur Spinning Mills Limited and ors. Vs. Assistant Registrar of Co ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-1987
Reported in: [1988]63CompCas882(Cal),91CWN1027
Monoranjan Mallick, J. 1. The present petitioners have moved this court in revision being aggrieved by the order dated January 4, 1986, by which the learned Metropolitan Magistrate rejected the prayer of the present petitioners for exemption from examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and issuing a warrant of arrest.2. The petitioners who are accused in Case No. C/1832 of 1980 under Section 162(1) of the Companies Act, 1956, pending in the court of the Metropolitan Magistrate, 17th Court, Calcutta, after the close of the evidence for the prosecution, filed the application in terms of the proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for dispensing with the examination under Section 313(1) of the Code on the ground that during the whole trial, the petitioners were exempted from their personal appearance under Section 205 of the Code. The learned Magistrate rejected their prayer and issued warrant of arrest against, them.3. B...
Mather and Platt (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-13-1987
Reported in: (1987)64CTR(Cal)95,[1987]168ITR533(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J.1. In the assessment year 1975-76, the accounting year ending on December 31, 1974, Mather & Platt (India) Ltd., the assessee, a company incorporated in the United Kingdom, obtained lease of a premises in New Delhi and another lease of premises at Calcutta known as 'Nilhat House' respectively for periods of 15 and 20 years. The assessee acquired the said leases for its offices at Calcutta and New Delhi.2. In the said assessment year, the assessee paid a fee of Rs. 42 to its lawyers, viz., Sandersons & Morgans, Calcutta, in connection with the lease agreement for its office at Nilhat House, and Rs. 380 to Orr Dignam & Co., New Delhi, for consultation regarding the lease of the said office at Delhi.3. On account of fees for registration of the lease agreement in respect of the premises, Nilhat House, and miscellaneous expenses connected therewith, the assessee incurred an expenditure of Rs. 2,160. The assesseefurther paid Rs. 12,500 to Cox & Cooks for securing the leas...
Prasanta Chandra Sen Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-1987
Reported in: [1990]67CompCas87(Cal)
Umesh Chandra Banerjee, J. 1. These two writ petitions by the selfsame writ petitioner pose certain interesting questions of law as regards the pleasure theory of the President of the Union of India under the Constitution, as also the jurisdiction of the writ court to intervene at the initial stage of a departmental proceeding. 2. Before adverting to the contentions raised, a brief reference to facts ought to be made at this juncture. The petitioner was appointed as the chairman and managing director of Burn Standard Co. Ltd. by an order dated January 11, 1982, by the President of India in exercise of the powers under Article 83 of the articles of association of the company for a period of two years at the first instance with immediate effect. Subsequently, by an order dated January 25, 1984, the two year-term was extended by a further period of three years and up to January 21, 1987. Under the abovenoted memorandum, the President was also pleased to allow the petitioner to hold the cu...
Sailen Seth Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-08-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Cal312
Sukumar Chakravarty, J.1. This appeal has arisen out of the order dated 3-9-86 passed by Sri S.B. Muhuri, learned Assistant District Judge, Burdwan, in Title Suit No. 175 of 1985, whereby the learned Judge rejected the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction. 2. The plaintiff filed the aforesaid Title Suit against the Steel Authority of India Limited (Defendant No. 1) and other defendants, who were the Officers of the Defendant No. 1 company for a declaration that the stoppage of work in Durgapur Branch Stock Yard between the period from June 14, 1984 to July 15, 1984, was due to wrongful, illegal and unwarranted action on the part of the defendants and that the plaintiff was not liable to the defendants for any alleged loss of the defendants arising out of or connected therewith; for accounts in respect of the claim of Rs. 4,63,660/- (four lakhs sixty three thousand six hundered and sixty) demanded by the defendant No. 2 on Jan. 30, 1985, or for any other claim arising out of...
Babulal Agarwalla Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-07-1987
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1287
ORDERM.R. Mallick, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated April 2,1986 passed by the Second Special Judge, Calcutta by which the learned Special Judge set aside the previous order dated 29th November, 1985 stopping further investigation under Section 167(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and discharging thereby the accused persons in G.R. Case No. 535 of 1985. Facts are briefly as follows:On March 2,1985 the petitioner No. 1 had been arrested for having committed an offence punishable under Section 7(l)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act for alleged violation of paragraph 3 of the West Bengal Declaration of Stock & Prices of Essential Commodities Order 1977 and also the provisions of the West Bengal Imported Vegetable Oil (Prohibition of Unauthorised Sales) Order, 1984. On September 2,1985 the Investigating Officer filed an application under Section 167(5) of the Criminal Procedure Code praying for extending the time for investigation beyond the statuto...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›