Kolkata Court September 1988 Judgments
Rahipada Saha Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-29-1988
Reported in: (1989)1CALLT191(HC)
Susanta Chatterji, J.1. Having heard Mr. Sircar for the petitioner and Mr. Datta for the State respondents,' it appears that the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the, respondents to revoke, cancel, rescind the Order contained in Memo No. 2043, dated 2-9-88 issued by the Additional District Magistrate, Murshidabad, being Annexure 'E' to the writ petition and to renew the licence in the sole name of the petitioner in respect of a pachai shop at Murshidabad and also to restrain the respondents from giving effect to the Order as communicated by Annexure 'F' to the writ petition by inviting, the eligible intending candidates in prescribed form for settlement of excise licence for the excise shop for the period of 1988-89. It is stated in the petition that originally the excise licence stood in the name of the petitioner and one Sm. Snehalata Saha. Said Snehalata Saha died on January 29, 1988. After her demise, the petitione...
Tag this Judgment!Mackinnon Mackenzie and Co. Ltd. Vs. Collr. of Customs (Appeals)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-28-1988
Reported in: 1989(43)ELT36(Cal)
Manoranjan Mallick, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order passed by the Deputy Collector Customs the Respondent No. 2 on 17th September 1985 imposing a penalty of a sum of Rs. 48,621/- for the alleged short-landing of 69.847 metric tons of the inedible bleachable fancy tallow in bulk. The writ petitioner Mackinon Mackenzie and Co. Ltd. is a Steamer Agent and as agent imported to the Calcutta port through the vessel Botany Trust a consignment of bleachable fancy tallow in bulk.2. The writ petitioner states as follows:The bill of lading relating to the said shipment of tallow issued by or on behalf of the shipowner acknowledged arrangement of a quantity 'said to be 3044.198 tons of inedible bleachable fancy tallow in bulk'. It was further stated in the said bill of lading that the quantity measurement weight of the cargo was unknown to the vessel and the Master. The weight of tallow shipped under the said bill of lading was 3027.997 metric tonnes as will appear from the l...
Tag this Judgment!Maulins of India Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-28-1988
Reported in: (1989)IILLJ400Cal
The petitioner Maulins of India Limited has two factories, one at Mohali in Punjab and the other at No. 12, Biren Roy Road (West), Behala, Calcutta-34. The petitioner-Company manufactures machines for manufacturing cigarettes, for packing pharmaceuticals, general purpose packaging machines and table-top off-set printing machines etc. at the said Mohali factory in Punjab. At its factory at Behala the petitioner-company manufactures spare-parts for cigarette industry and other precision engineering items. The Company employed about 247 workmen at the said factory at Behala including 10 canteen boys.2. On 19th September, 1987, the Company submitted an application for permission to close down the factory at Behala. The grounds were that there has been a serious decline in the demand for the products of the Company. Owing to the reduced off-take of the Company's products, the goods manufactured remained in stack and unsold, which in turn resulted in six-fold burden of interest over the last...
Tag this Judgment!Namita Mukherjee Vs. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-27-1988
Reported in: [1989]176ITR73(Cal)
Susanta Chatterjee, J.1. The present writ petition has been filed for the issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding respondents Nos. 1 to 4 to forbear from giving effect to the appellate order of the Tribunal dated November 19, 1987, and subsequent orders dated May 17, 1988, and July 27, 1988, as fully described in the writ petition itself. It is stated that in the course of hearing of the assessment under Section 58(2) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, before the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty, furnishing a genealogical table and claiming that the house property was absolutely owned by her, the Appellate Controller of Estate Duty, by his order dated September 2, 1986, negatived the contention of the petitioner that she was the owner of the said house property and that such property did not pass on the death of the deceased. Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal contending, inter alia, that the said D.P. Mukherjee died intestate leaving him surv...
Tag this Judgment!Bibhas Chandra Bose Vs. Sm. Dolly Bose Nee Dutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-23-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Cal190,93CWN388
A.M. Bhattacharjee, J. 1. The first part of Order 6 Rule 17 of the Civil P.C. providing that 'the Court may' allow either party to amend his pleading, has given rise to a general impression that amendments of pleading always rest in the discretion of a Court. The impression, however deep-rooted, is not well-founded, for it ignores the second part of Rule 17 providing that 'all such amendments shall be made as may be necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties'. The user of the two words 'May' and 'shall' in such close proximity in the same sentence would at once demonstrate that one cannot mean the other, unless we choose to, which we should not, think that the Legislature had no sense of words. The conclusion, therefore, must be that while the first part of Rule 17 dealing with amendments in general vests the Court with discretion, the later part, dealing with such amendments as are necessary for the purpose of determining the real co...
Tag this Judgment!Ajita Ray and ors. Vs. the Competent Authority and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-23-1988
Reported in: (1989)1CALLT46(HC),93CWN757
S.K. Mookherjee, J.1. This Rule raises an important question concerning the nature and ambit of the option conferred on a person under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, thereinafter referred to as the Act.) 2. The petitioners claim to be owners of 789.33 square maters of vacant land being premises No. 23A/391 Diamond Harbour Road, Block 'G', New Alipore, Calcutta. The petitioner No. 1 filed a Return in terms of sub-section. (1) of Section 6 of the aforesaid Act purporting to retain the entire land. The Competent Authority under the said Act, by the draft statement under Section 8 thereof, tentatively, allowed the said petitioner to retain 500 square meters and invited Objection to such draft statement. The petitioner No. 1 having submitted Objection/the same was disposed of purportedly by an Order, dated 30th August, 1979 (Annexure 'B' to the Affidavit-in-opposition on behalf of the respondents Nos. 1. 2 and 4 ). Consequent upon such order disposing of the petitioner's...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Swadesh Ranjan Sarkar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-22-1988
Reported in: (1989)1CALLT415(HC),1989(19)ECC158,1989(21)LC100(Calcutta),1993(64)ELT190(Cal)
Susanta Chatterji, J.1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, who claims to be the Officer-in-Charge of Lalgola Police Station, District-Murshidabad, praying inter alia for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to rescind, withdraw and/or candel the Order, dated 12.12.85, 12.8.86 and 30.5.88 respectively passed by the Assistant Collector of Customs, respondent No. 2. The Collector of Customs (Appeal), respondent No. 3 and the Member (Judicial) of Customs and Excise and Gold (Control), respondent No. 4. The copies of the said Orders are marked as Annexures 'C', 'D', and 'E' to the writ petition. It is stated that being a Police Officer the petitioner is to combat with the miscreants, anti-socials in order to protect the life, property and safety of the public at large and for the said purpose the petitioner is to carry a revolver all the time. It is further stated that the petitioner's own elder brother went to England for higher studies and the...
Tag this Judgment!Siddheswar Das and ors. Vs. Dhirendra Nath Das and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-22-1988
Reported in: (1989)1CALLT419(HC),100CWN1040
Monoranjan Mallick, J.1. In this Originating Summons the plaintiffs seek the determination of the following questions :(a) Whether after the death the said Bhuban Mohan Das the Office of the Shebait has reverted to the heirs of the said Srinath Das ;(b) If the answer to question (a) are in the affirmative, whether the plaintiffs and the defendants being the surviving great grandsons of the testator are his only heirs and joint shebaits of the Debutter Estate ;(c) If the answers to questions (a) and (b) above are in the affirmative, the plaintiffs submit that in view of the large number of shebaits, a scheme should be framed by the Hon'ble Court and/or directions therefor he given and/or such Orders and/or such other direction be given for proper management and administration of the Debutter State as the Hon'ble Court may seem fit;(d) Perpetual injunction restraining the defendant No. 1 and his servants and agents and each of them from intermeddling with the Debutter Estate exclusively ...
Tag this Judgment!Associated Indam Mechanical Private Ltd. and anr. Vs. C.E.S.C. and ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-21-1988
Reported in: (1989)1CALLT187(HC)
Susanta Chatterji, J.1. The petitioner M/s. Associated Indam Mechanical Private Ltd. and one of its Directors have jointly filed the present writ petition praying, inter alia, for issuance of a writ mandamus commanding and/or directing the respondents and/or their employees and agents to restore electricity of consumer No. 30008010006 being Meter No. LF 0674290 and LF 0402738 at 3, Esplanade East, Calcutta-69 and for other consequential reliefs as stated therein. It is stated in the writ petition that M/s. Associated Indam Mechanical Private Ltd., is a private limited Company having incorporated under the Companies Act and has its registered Office at 3, Esplanade East, Calcutta and factory at Howrah Industrial Estate. It is further stated that the petitioners were enjoying electricity from 1968 to 9.8.88 from the meter standing in the name of Sudson Pvt. Ltd. being consumer number as stated above. It is further alleged that while there is a chain of correspondence between the petition...
Tag this Judgment!Manu Bhai Some Chand Vora Vs. S.K. Kar, S.D.J.M. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-21-1988
Reported in: (1989)1CALLT245(HC)
Monoranjan Mallick, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner who is an accused in the criminal case No. 1536 of 1984 pending before the Respondent No. 2 prays for a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondents forthwith to forbear from proceeding of the above criminal proceeding and a writ in the nature of Prohibition prohibiting and restraining each one of them from proceeding in any manner whatsoever with the Criminal complaint No. 1536 of 1984.2. By a supplementary Affidavit, dated 17th March 1988 the petitioner prays for quashing the complaint case No. 1536 of 1984, It is complained that the Respondent No. 3 filed a false complaint firstly on 27th December 1982 against the petitioner alleging commission of offence under Sections 420/406/403 of the I.P.C. Because of the absence of the complainant, the petitioner was discharged on 24th August, 1984. Thereafter on 27th October, 1984 the Respondent No. 3 filed another complaint against the petitioner being complaint case...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »