Kolkata Court April 1988 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.
Tripura Jute Mills Ltd. Vs. Standard Chartered Bank
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1988
Reported in: (1988)2CALLT413(HC),[1991]70CompCas829(Cal)
Monoranjan Mallick, J.1. Tripura Jute Mills Ltd. has filed the suit against the Standard Chartered Bank, the defendant, for recovery of a sum of Rs. 10,38,440 on the following allegations :By a tender notice published in August, 1974, the plaintiff invited tenders from the manufacturers of machinery for the supply and delivery of plant and equipment required for a jute mill to be set up at Agartala in the State of Tripura. By the letter dated September 28, 1974, addressed to the plaintiff, M/s. Bird and Co. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the said sellers') offered to manufacture and sell the machinery required by the plaintiff. Thereafter, negotiations started between the plaintiff and the sellers regarding the terms and conditions of the proposed contract and in the course of such negotiations, it was agreed that the plaintiff would pay the sellers a total sum of Rs. 40,63,844 by way of advance, in instalments provided the sellers furnished a bank guarantee or guarantees in favour ...
Bhailal Mukherjee Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-12-1988
Reported in: 1989(22)ECC61,1988(35)ELT629(Cal)
Sudhir Ranjan Roy, J.1. These five Civil Rules were taken up for analogous hearing and disposal since they involve practically common questions of fact and law and this common judgment will govern all the said Civil Rules. It would be convenient to state the relevant facts only relating to C.R. No. 815(W) of 1980.2. The petitioner No. 1 is a Steamer Agent and the petitioner No. 2 is the Chief Accountant of the petitioner No. 1 Company and holder of the Power of Attorney on its behalf.3. The petitioner No. 1 acted as a Steamer Agent for M/s. Shinwa Katun Kaisha Ltd. Tokyo, representing their vessel M.V. Golden Wistaria.4. The said vessel carrying Ammonium Sulphate and Urea arrived at the Port of Calcutta on September 23, 1977.5. In the matter of unloading of the ships of the cargo, M/s. J.B. Boda, Marina & General Survey Agencies (P) Ltd. (in short, the Surveyor) was appointed to arrange off hire Survey of the said vessel (Annexure 'C').6. M/s. Asian Agency worked as clearing agents for...
Dr. Utpal Kumar Banerjee Vs. Smt. Majula Debi Banerjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-11-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Cal80,92CWN1123
A.M. Bhattacharjee, J. 1. Anorder under Section 24, Hindu Marriage Act for maintenance pendente lite and expenses of the proceeding in a matrimonial proceeding is obviously passed to provide the weaker spouse with such fund as may be reasonably necessary for her or his support and for the carriage of the litigation and such an order automatically comes to an end with the termination of the main proceeding in the Court which passes the order. The proceeding being rather summary in nature, the object of the order being ad hoc and the duration of the order being temporary, the approach of the Court to such an order should be ut res magis valeat qnam pereat, to sustain it wherever possible and not to interfere unless intervention is irresistible in law.2. That goes to explain as to why the Amendment Act of 1976 has taken care to make it clear by amending Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act that no appeal would be available against any such order, as prior to such amendment there was a vie...
Smt. Bibhabati Ghosh Vs. Panchu Gopal Paul
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-11-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Cal244
Sankari Prasad Das Ghosh, J.1. This is an appeal by the widow of a tenant against a decree for eviction on the ground of reasonable requirement of landlord for his own use and occupation and for use and occupation of the members of his family.2. One Jatindra Nath Ghosh was a tenant in respect of one room at the ground floor of premises No. 19, Sibdash Bhaduri Street P. S. Shyampukur, Calcutta, (hereinafter called the suit-room' for the sake of convenience) under the plaintiff-respondent at a rent of Rs. 14.87 p., per month, payable according to the English Calendar month. The plaintiff- respondent filed a suit for eviction of Jatindra from the suit-room on twofold grounds viz., subletting and reasonable requirement of the suit-room by him for use and occupation by the members of his family. During trial, the ground of subletting was not pressed. The defence was a denial of the alleged reasonable requirement of the suit-room by the landlord for use and occupation by the members of his f...
Gopal Hosiery Vs. Assistant Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-08-1988
Reported in: 1989(41)ELT35(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J.1. The petitioner No. 1 is a registered partnership firm. Its factory and office are located at 61, Ibrahimpur Road, Jadavpur, 24-Parganas. The petitioner No. 2 is a partner No 32. It is the case of the petitioners that they manufacture 'articles of hosiery'. The products manufactured by the petitioners were not liable to levy of any excise duty under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, and was not subjected to tax since the petitioners began its business even before 1962.3. In the year 1971 by the Finance Act, 1971, a new tariff item No. 22D was introduced in the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. Under the said item No. 22D 'articles of ready-to-wear apparel and body supporting garments' were for the first time brought under the levy of C. E. duty. The tariff description was as under:-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Item Description of goods. Rate of duty.No.-----------------------------...
Bank of India and ors. Vs. Kalyan Kumar Sarkar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-06-1988
Reported in: (1998)2CALLT130(HC),1998(2)CHN15,(1999)ILLJ904Cal
S.B. Sinha, J. 1. This appeal is directed against a Judgment and order dated 31.5.90 passed by a learned single Judge of this court whereby and whereunder the writ petition filed by the petitioner claiming, inter alia, the following reliefs were allowed.'(a) a Writ of declaration declaring the petitioner was in continuous service since 17th September 1973 till 21st July 1987 as an Officer of Bank of India; (b) a Writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding upon the respondents not to withhold any payment of Gratuity and Provident Fund dues of the petitioner as an Officer of the Bank of India.' 2. The fact of the matter lies in a very narrow compass.3. The appellant bank was nationalised in terms of the banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970. Section 21 of the said Act was brought into force under section 1(2) of the said Act on 19.7.69. The Board of Directors, in terms of the aforementioned provisions, are entitled to frame regulation relating to service cond...
Dr. Shibendu Mohan Lahiri and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-06-1988
Reported in: (1988)2CALLT46(HC)
Paritosh Kumar Mukherjee, J.1. The writ petitioners, who are 49 in number are all members of the medical profession and are working for gain at Calcutta National Medical College and Hospital at 32, Gorachand Road, Calcutta-14, and they are all exmanagement staff and serving the said Medical College and Hospital before taking over of the management of the Hospital by the State of West Bengal with effect from June 9, 1967.2. By Calcutta National Medical College and Hospital Act, 1967 (West Bengal Act XII of 1967) (hereinafter referred to as the 1967 Act), the Calcutta National Medical College and Hospital was taken over to make better provision for the control, management and maintenance of the institution together with the hospitals and dispensaries attached thereto initially for a period of 10 years with effect_ from June 9, 1967.3. In view of Section 3(5) of the said 1967 Act, the institution was directed to be run by the State Government, as a State institution and Section 6 of the s...
Lava Mishra Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-06-1988
Reported in: 1989(22)ECC94,1989(40)ELT301(Cal)
Baboo Lall Jain, J.1. This is an application made by Lava Mishra under Article 226 of the Constitution of India inter alia for issue of a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to withhold and/or forbear from giving effect to or acting in terms of the purported order of detention passed under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange & Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act (hereinafter also referred to as 'Cofeposa') against the petitioner, a writ in the nature of certiorari, calling upon the respondents to produce before this Court, the records relevant to the purported order passed under the Cofeposa, so that conscionable justice may be done by quashing and/or setting aside the same. The petitioner also prayed for an injunction restraining the respondents from giving any effect to or taking any steps in furtherance of implementing the order of detention passed under Cofeposa against the petitioner as referred to in the petition. The other prayer in the said writ petiti...
Dulal Chandra Ghosh and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-06-1988
Reported in: 1988CriLJ1835
J.N. Hore, J.1. The five appellants and one Ananda Ghosh, since deceased, were arraigned before a learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nadia, to answer the following charges:First - That you, on or about the 15th day of December, 1984 at Ushidpur within P.S. Kotwali, were member of an unlawful assembly and did in prosecution of the common object of such assembly viz. in committing the murder of Mantu Ghosh commit the offence of rioting and at that time were armed with deadly weapons to wit Ramdao, falaetc. and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code, and within my cognizance.Secondly - That you, on or about the same day and at the same place in furtherance of common intention did commit murder by intentionally causing the death of Mantu Ghosh and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, and within my cognizance.Accused Ananda Ghosh died before the commencement of trial.2. After completion of the tria...
In Re: Mahamaya Banerjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-05-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Cal106,(1988)2CALLT260(HC)
Manoj Kumar Mukherjee, J.1. Gita Banerjee, the predecessor-in-interest of the opposite parties, filed a partition suit (Title Suit No. 7/77) in the Third Court of the Subordinate Judge (Assistant District Judge), Howrah, against her sister, the petitioner herein, claiming a moiety share in the suit property. For non-appearance of the petitioner the suit was decreed ex parte in a preliminary form on January 18, 1978. On March 2, 1979 the petitioner, through her learned Advocate Sri Sachin Mukherjee, filed an application under O. 9, R. 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure ('Code' for short) for setting aside the ex parte decree which was registered as Misc. Case No. 15 of 1979. On July 14, 1979 the petitioner filed another application through the said Advocate with a prayer for drawing up of another preliminary decree by setting aside the ex parte decree earlier passed after taking into consideration the fact that pursuant to a deed of settlement executed by their father on August 8, 1965 s...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »