Kolkata Court May 1990 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.
Ellenberric Steels Ltd. Vs. Regional Dev. Commr. for Iron and Steel
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-09-1990
Reported in: 1992(59)ELT242(Cal)
A.M. Bhattacharjee, J.1. The Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947 empowers the Central Government to prohibit, restrict or otherwise control, imports and exports. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sections 3 and 4A of that Act, the Imports (Control) Order, 1955 has been issued, Schedule I whereof contains the list of articles of which imports are controlled. The import of such items is prohibited except - (a) under and in accordance with a licence or customs clearance, or (b) when they are covered by the Savings Clause 11 of the Order, or (c) when they are covered by an Open General Licence, subject to such conditions as may be stipulated therein.2. The Import and Export Policy for the period April, 1988 to March, 1991, declared by the authority concerned, is published by the Ministry of Commerce in two Volumes, Volume I containing the Imports and Exports Promotion Policy and Volume II contain the policy and procedure in respect of Items under Export licensing. As would appear ...
Bilenbarric Steels Limited Vs. Regional Development Commissioner for I ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-08-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Cal62,95CWN208
ORDER1. The Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947 empowers the Central Government to prohibit, restrict or otherwise control imports and exports. In exercise of the powers conferred by S. 3 and 4A of that Act the Imports (Control) Order, 1955 has been issued, Schedule I whereof contains the list of articles of which Imports are controlled. The import of such items is prohibited except (a) under and in accordance with a licence or customs clearance, or, (b) when they are covered by the Savings Clause 11 of the Order, or (c) when they are covered by an Open General Licence, subject to such conditions as may be stipulated therein.2. The Import and Export Policy for the period April, 1988 to March, 1991, declared by the authority concerned, is published by the Ministry of Commerce in two Volumes, Volume I containing the Imports and Exports Promotion Policy and Volume II containing the Policy and Procedure in respect of Items under Export licensing. As would appear from paragraph 1(2) of ...
Krishan Kumar Agarwala Vs. Reserve Bank of India and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-08-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Cal272,94CWN919
ORDER1. In this application filed by the respondents for vacation of the ex parte interim order of injunction issued against them, the two questions that have arisen for consideration are -- (a) whether the ex parte interim order has automatically stood vacated on the ground of the application for vacation not having been disposed of within the period specified in Clause (3) of Article 226, and (b) whether on the facts and circumstances and the relevant law on the point, the order, if still in operation, should be discharged or otherwise altered, or, if the order is no longer in operation, a fresh interim order is warranted.2. Where an interim order has been made after giving the party affected an opportunity of being heard, such an order is ordinarily not to be discharged or varied unless such discharge or variation has been necessitated by a change in the circumstances or unless the Court is satisfied that the order has caused undue hardship. But when such an interim order has been m...
Modi Vanijya and ors. Vs. Metal Scrap Trade Corporation Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-08-1990
Reported in: (1991)1CALLT156(HC),[1991]72CompCas515(Cal),95CWN269
Kalyanmoy Ganguli, J.1. In the instant application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners pray for a two-fold remedy by way of directing the respondents, in effect, to allow a reasonable extension of the validity period of the letter of credit and extension of time for shipment and restraining the respondents from invoking the performance guarantee or from demanding any payment under the bank guarantee without disposing of the application for extension of time for shipment.2. Petitioner No. 1 is a registered partnership firm of which petitioner No. 2 is one of the partners but petitioner No. 3 is a limited company having its registered office at 17, Dornars Street, London, WIP 3 DD, that is to say, petitioner No. 3 is a foreign company. Petitioner No. 1 is the agent of petitioner No. 3 in India. Pursuant to a tender, the offer of petitioner No. 3 wasaccepted through petitioner No. 1 by respondent No. 1. A concluded contract containing various terms and conditio...
Bengal Tools Ltd. Vs. Registrar of Companies and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-08-1990
Reported in: (1991)1CALLT321(HC),[1991]71CompCas85(Cal),95CWN138
J.N. Hore, J.1. This is an application under Section 401 and Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for setting aside the order dated December 27, 1984, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Calcutta, in Case No. C/3532 of 1984 pending in his court and for quashing further proceedings in the said case.2. On December 27, 1984, the Registrar of Companies, West Bengal, filed a petition of complaint in the court of the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta, against the petitioner, M/s. Bengal Tools Ltd., and six of its directors alleging commission of an offence under Rule 11 read with Rule 3A of the Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 1975, and Section 58A of the Companies Act, 1956. On December 27, 1984, the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta, took cognizance of the alleged offence and issued process under Section 58A of the Companies Act read with Rule 3A of the Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 1975, against the petitioner c...
M/S Hinduathan Commercial Company Vs. Baidyanath Bhattacharjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-08-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Cal88
ORDERShamsuddin Ahmed, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 8th Court, Alipore in Title Appeal No. 952 of 85 reversing the judgment and decree passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, 2nd Court, Alipore in Title Suit No. 206 of 1983.2. The plaintiff-appellant Hindusthan Commercial Company instituted a suit for possession of the disputed property being premises No. 20, Mayfair Raod (formally 19, Mayfair Road, Calucutta). Their case was that one Smt. Bani Lahiri was the owner of the property. She demised the suit property in favour of the defendant/respondent by a registered deed of lease dt. 24-11-62 for a period 21 years commencing from 31-10-62. The monthly rent was fixed at Rs. 1,000/-. The plaintiff company purchased the suit property from said Bani Lahiri by a registered kobala dt. 25-1-82 and became the absolute owner of the suit premises. Because of the purchase the lease aforesaid stood assigned in their fa...
Tarun Kumare De Biswas Vs. Presiding Officer, Central Government Indus ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-08-1990
Reported in: 95CWN216,(1991)IILLJ208Cal
K. Ganguli, J.1. The subject matter of challenge in this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is an award passed by the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Calcutta in Reference No. 44 of 1979 on February 2, 1984.2. The matter was very hotly contested and both parties made very long arguments in support of their respective contentions. Both sides also cited a number of case laws.The admitted position seems to be as follows :-The petitioner was appointed as a subordinate staff of the respondent No. 3 in 1969 and on April 2, 1975, he was promoted to the post of clerk on probation after he had obtained his degree of Bachelor of Commerce. It is also the admitted position that soon after his promotion to the post of Clerk, the petitioner became a chronic absentee and in fact learned Tribunal found that between August, 1975 and February, 1976 the petitioner was absent on 94 days. It is also the common case of the parties that the petitioner was a...
West Bengal Headmasters' Association and Ors. Vs. State of West Bengal ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-08-1990
Reported in: (1990)2CALLT327(HC),94CWN1166
Khwaja Mohammad Yusuf, J.1. The petitioners have moved this writ application against the impugned Memo No. 372-Edn.(B) dated 31st July, 1981 for writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents to cancel and withdraw the offending portion of the said Memo by which the age of retirement has been reduced from 65 years to 60 years, a writ of Certiorari for quashing the relevant 'portion of the said impugned Memo which had reduced the age of retirement from 65 years to 60 years and also a writ of Prohibition directing the respondents not to make any discrimination in the matter of fixation of the age of retirement amongst the teaching and non-teaching staff. The 'offending portion' of the impugned Memo dated 31st July, 1981 as described in paragraph 25 of the writ petition which is the target of attack is a portion of Clause 6 of the said Memo which is quoted as under :-'The teachers in all Government aided educational institutions opting for the revised scales of pay shall retire at 60 years, ...
Acharya Jagadishwaranada Avadhuta and Another Vs. Commissioner of Poli ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-07-1990
Reported in: AIR1990Cal336,(1990)2CALLT212(HC)
ORDER1. This writ application was moved by the petitioner who is the General Secretary, Public Relations Department of the Ananda Margy Pracharak Sangha and the Ananda Margo Pracharak Sangha, a religious organisation propounded by Sri Ananda Murtiji, praying for a writ and/or a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to act and proceed in accordance with law and to cancel, rescind and/or withdraw the impugned order dated 20th May 1987 and 27th May 1987 which are Annexure 'B' to the petition and also commanding the respondents to allow Tandava Dance in public procession of Ananda Margas on the occasion of its principal religious functions and festivals such as (i) Ananda Purnima, (ii) Shravani Purnima, (Hi) Vijaya Dashami, (iv) Dipavali, (v) New Years Day, (vi) Phalguni purnima (Vasantotsava) and (vii) Dharma Maha Chakras and Dharma Maha Sammelanas.2. By the letter dated 20th May 1987 the Commissioner of Police informed the petitioner No. 1 that the permission for publ...
Sri Bhola Nath Sen Vs. the Chief Election Commissioner and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-02-1990
Reported in: (1990)2CALLT282(HC),94CWN884
A.M. Bhattacharjee, J.1. The petitioner, who contested a parliamentary election without success, has filed this petition for a Writ to direct the Respondents 'to supply the report submitted by the Observer appointed by the Election Commission in respect of 'the said parliamentary election. The election in question was held on 24th November, 1989 and this petition has been filed on 8th January, 1990, when admittedly the period prescribed for filing an election petition challenging the election in question has already expired, the period prescribed being forty-five days from the date of election of the returned candidate.2. The petitioner has not, as asserted by him repeatedly in the petition and also by his learned Counsel during the hearing, prayed for setting aside of the election nor for any relief in respect of the result declared. He could not obviously do so with Article 329 of the Constitution starting at the face prohibiting any challenge to such election except by an Election P...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »