Kolkata Court April 1988 Judgments
Life Insurance Corporation of India and ors. Vs. Amalendu Gupta and or ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-29-1988
Reported in: (1988)IILLJ495Cal
Baboo Lall Jain, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by Life Insurance Corporation of India and Ors. from the judgment of PC. Borooah, J. delivered on August 25th, 1982, pursuant to the application made by Amalendu Gupta and others. The said Amalendu Gupta and Ors. made an application under Article 226 of Constitution of India inter alia praying that a writ in the nature of Mandamus be issued, directing Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter also referred to for the sake of brevity as 'LIC') to cancel the circulars and/or orders dated 16th April 1981 and 23rd April 1981 issued by the Senior Divisional Manager, LIC Calcutta Divisional Office. The said Amalendu Gupta and Ors. (hereinafter also referred to as 'employees') also prayed that the LIC be directed to refund and/or restore 14 days' wages and allowances deducted by the LIC from the April, 1981 salaries of the Class III and Class IV employees of the LIC. A rule was issued pursuant to the said application and affidavits were...
Tag this Judgment!Hindusthan Welfare Trust Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-28-1988
Reported in: (1988)26ITD1a(Kol.)
1. This appeal is by the assessee, a trust, assessed in the status of an "association of persons". The appeal relates to the assessment year 1981-82. The accounting period is the period 1-4-1980 to 31-3-1981. In the accounting period, the assessee-trust sold the shares of about 14 companies. The total price realised came to Rs. 63,52,565. The cost of these shares was Rs. 23,25,466. The difference which was the capital gain was Rs. 40,27,099. The assessee claimed that the aforesaid net consideration arising out of the sale of shares should be deemed to have been applied for charitable purposes since the assessee had acquired "another capital asset" within the meaning of the said term as occurring in Section 11(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. The assessee had given particulars of the utilisation of the net consideration of Rs. 63.52 lakhs which have been reproduced in the assessment order and are as under : Deposit with Rs. 31,75,000 Bank. 31-5-1981 -do- Rs. 17,25,000 Rs. 49,00,000 D...
Tag this Judgment!Howrah Wholesale Fish Traders' Association and Ors. Vs. State of West ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-28-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Cal97
ORDERG.N. Ray, J. 1. These two Rules have been heard together as similar questions of law and fact are involved in both the matters and both the said Rules are disposed of by this judgment.2. The short facts relating to the writ petitions concerning the two Rules arc that the Howrah Wholesale Fish Traders' Association is a registered association under the West Bengal Societies Registration Act, 1961 and the President, Secretary, Joint Secretary, one of the executive members of the said Association and the other members of the said Association are the petitioners in the said two Rules. It is the case of the petitioners that all the members of the said Associations are fish traders. Some of the members carry on such trade in fish as a proprietor and some carry on business in fish trading as partners of the partnership firm. The petitioners have contended that theyhad been carrying on such business of fish at Nos. 10 and 11, I.C. Bose Road, Nos. 15, 30 and 27, Sreemanta Kundu Lane, 74 Har...
Tag this Judgment!Partha Pratim Bandopadhyay Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-27-1988
Reported in: (1988)2CALLT307(HC)
G.N. Ray, J.1. This appeal is directed against Order, dated 9th of September, 1987 passed by the learned Trial Judge in disposing of CO. No. 5237(W) of 1987. The writ petitioner is the appellant in the instant appeal and the aforesaid writ petition relating to CO. No. 5237(W) of 1987 was dismissed by the learned Trial Judge. It appears that for the appointment of Sub-Assistant Engineers in the categories of Electrical and Mechanical under the Calcutta Metropolitan Water and Sanitation Authority (CMWSA), names from different Employment Exchanges were called for. It may be noted in this connection that under the existing policy of the Government the names are to be sponsored by the local Employment Exchanges for getting appointment under the State Government. It also appears from Annexure 'D' to the affidavit- in-opposition filed by the respondents that so far as the Howrah Employment Exchange is concerned, for Sub-Assistant Engineer in the category of Electrical and Mechanical under CMW...
Tag this Judgment!Sm. Helen Roy Chowdhury Vs. Bama Charan Mukherjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-27-1988
Reported in: (1989)1CALLT1(HC),93CWN161
Monoj Kumar Mukherjee, J.1. The petitioner filed an application under Section 10 of the City Civil Court Act, 1953 ('Act' for short) for transfer of Title Suit No. 1183 of 1985, in which she is the plaintiff, from the learned Judge, Third Bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta to some other learned Judge of that Court on the such apprehension were detailed in the application. After hearing the parties the learned Chief Judge, of the City Civil Court rejected the application, without going into its merits, on a finding that power under Section 10 of the Act could be exercised by him only to ensure proper distribution of business or to give effect to the provisions of Section 11 of the Act, and it did not extend to grounds canvassed by the petitioner. Aggrieved thereby the .petitioner has filed his application intituling it as one under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Article 227 of the Constitution of India. - : 2. In the context of the above facts the only point that falls fo...
Tag this Judgment!Tim Shaw Private Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-27-1988
Reported in: 1989(24)ECC188,1989(43)ELT30(Cal)
Susanta Chatterji, J.1. The present Rule was issued on 3-8-1982 at the instance of the writ petitioner, a private limited company, challenging the impugned orders dated 31st January 1981.21st August 1981 and 1st January 1982, being in annexures 'A', 'B' and 'C' respectively.2. It is stated in the writ petition that the writ petitioner is a small scale unit which undertakes job work like peeling vaneer from logs supplied by manufacturers of plywood. It is the specific case of the petitioner that it peels 'timber in log form' on job work basis for Veneer Mills Private Limited, a Central Excise assessee for manufacture of plywood. The Superintendent of Customs and Central Excise, Jaypur issued a show cause noticed on the petitioner saying that the petitioner had cleared commercial veneer (Tariff Item No. 68) without payment of duty and thus had contravened Rules 173F and 9(1) of Central Excise Rules. It is the case of the petitioner that in terms of Notification No. 119/75-C.E. Excise Dut...
Tag this Judgment!Sibnath Mukhopadhyay Vs. Sunita Mukhopadhyay (Chatterjee)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-25-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Cal84,(1988)2CALLT106(HC),92CWN1196,I(1990)DMC101
A.M. Bhattacharjee, J.1. Ahusband's petition for restitution of conjugal rights was not only opposed by the wife but was countered with a claim for dissolution of the marriage on the ground of cruelty committed by the husband. Section 23A of the Hindu Marriage Act, as inserted by the Amendment Act of 1976, has now expressly permitted such counter claim providing that -'in any proceeding for restitution of conjugal rights, the respondent may not only oppose the relief sought on the ground of petitioner's adultery, cruelty or desertion, but also make a counterclaim for any relief under this Act on that ground; and if the petitioner's adultery, cruelty_ or desertion is proved, the Court may give to the respondent any relief under this Act to which he or she would have been entitled if he or she had presented a petition seeking such relief on that ground.'2. This section, to our mind, has again demonstrated carelessness and also 'slovenliness in drafting' which, as pointed out by Bhagwati,...
Tag this Judgment!Sankar Lal Shaw and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-25-1988
Reported in: (1988)2CALLT228(HC)
Paritosh Kumar Mukherjee, J.1. The present writ petition was moved on February 24, 1978, challenging, inter alia, an order of requisition, dated August 7, 1976, of the premises No. 17, Girish Avenue, Calcutta, passed under Section 3 of the West Bengal Premises Requisition and Control (Temporary Provision) Act, 1947 (Act V of 1947) (hereinafter referred to as the 1947 Act), whereupon this Court issued a Rule and granted injunction in terms of prayer (f) for a limited period. An application for vacating interim order being filed on behalf of the State, considering the fact that the possession of the premises having already been taken by the State Government, this court passed no order on the said application, but fixed early hearing of the Rule by Order, dated June 29, 1978.2. Unfortunately. although the hearing has been fixed by Amiya Kumar Mukherji, J, by His Loardship's Order, dated June 29, 1978, the hearing of the writ petition could not be commenced till this matter was mentioned b...
Tag this Judgment!N.K. GossaIn and Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dytron (India) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-22-1988
Reported in: (1988)2CALLT424(HC),[1990]69CompCas757(Cal)
Satya Brata Mitra, J.1. This is an application of N. K. Gossain and Co. Pvt. Ltd. for winding up of Dytron (India) Ltd. on the ground of inability to pay the debts due to the petitioning creditor.2. The case of the petitioning creditor is that on February 6, 1986, the company placed orders to the petitioning creditor for printing of 38,000 copies of the annual reports of the company. The petitioning creditor, after completing the printing job, delivered those materials to the said company in the month of March, 1986, and the company received those materials and accepted them without raising any objection. It is the case of the petitioning creditor that the company utilised the said materials and must be deemed to have accepted the printing job of these materials. Thereafter, the petitioning creditor raised bills on March 28, 1986, for a sum of Rs. 3,68,670.02 which were received by the company on March 31, 1986. The petitioning creditor states that the company made a part payment of Rs...
Tag this Judgment!Broja Kishore Ghosh Vs. Krishna Ghosh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-21-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Cal327
Ajit Kumar Nayak, J. 1. This appeal is at the instance of Brojo Kishore Ghosh against his wife the respondent Smt. Krishna Ghosh who obtained a decree for divorce on 19-3-84 in matrimonial suit No. 58 of 1980 in the Court of 14th Additional District Judge, Alipore, 24 Parganas on the ground of cruelty under Section 27(1)(d),Special Marriage Act, 1954. The appellant/opposite party Brojo Kishore Ghosh and the respondent-petitioner Smt. Krishna Ghosh, both citizens of India, were married in Calcutta under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 on 16th Mar., 1971. It was an intercaste marriage. The wife, respondent before marriage was a brahmin while the husband, appellant was a non-brahmin. The appellant was a close neighbour and tenant in a premises by the side of the residence of the petitioner-respondent at 9/3, Krishna Mullick Lane, P.S. Uhadanga. In or about the year 1970, the parties became known to each other, developed intimacy between them, which resulted in such marriage allegedly accor...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »