Kolkata Court August 1991 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.
Rajendra Kumar Arya Vs. Messrs New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Unit : the ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-16-1991
Reported in: 1992ACJ1026,AIR1992Cal110
ORDERAbani Mohan Sinha, J.1. Thisappeal by plaintiff-appellant is directed against the judgment and decree of dismissal passed by the learned Judge 4th Bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta in Money Suit No. 65 of 1974. The plaintiff brought this suit for recovery of insurance claim and for other reliefs. He was the owner of Motor Car Standard omnibus ADX 1353. The vehicle was insured with Commonwealth Assurance Company Ltd. on November 19, 1968. The said company merged with New India Insurance Company Ltd. after the nationalisation of the insurance with effect from 1-1-1973. The plaintiff obtained' a comprehensive risk policy on payment of Rs. 812/- as premium for a sum of Rs. 20.000/- on 19-1-69. The vehicle was involved in an accident near Cuttack resulting in an extensive damage to it tantamounting the total loss. The fact was brought to the notice of the police and insurance company. The insurance company instructed the plaintiff to bring the damaged vehicle to Calcutta for getting it...
Rajendra Kumar Arya Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-16-1991
Reported in: I(1993)ACC481
Abani Mohan Sinha, J.1. This appeal by plaintiff-appellant is directed against the judgment and decree of dismissal passed by the learned Judge 4th Bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta in Money Suit No. 65 of 1974. The plaintiff brought this suit for recovery of insurance claim and for other relief's. He was the owner of motor car Standard Omni bus ADX1353. The vehicle was insured with Commonwealth Assurance Company Ltd. On November 19, 1968. The said company merged with New India Assurance Co. Ltd. after the nationalisation of the insurance with effect from 1.1.1973. The plaintiff obtained a comprehensive risk policy on payment of Rs. 812/- as premium for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- on 19.1.1969. The vehicle was involved in an accident near Cuttack resulting in an extensive damage to it tantamounting the total loss. The fact was brought to the notice of the police and Insurance Company. The Insurance Company instructed the plaintiff to bring the damaged vehicle to Calcutta for getting it repai...
Indian Aluminium Company Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-1991
Reported in: [1993]200ITR207(Cal)
Susanta Chatterji, J. 1. The writ petitioner, Indian Aluminium Company Limited, has prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent to issue the refund vouchers for interest under Section 244 of the Income-tax Act to the petitioner for the assessment years 1957-58, 1958-59, 1959-60, 1960-61 and 1961-62 and to pay interest thereon at 18 per cent. per annum from the respective dates when the said amount became refundable. It is stated that, under Section 240 of the Income taxAct, 1961, where, as a result of any order passed in appeal or other proceedings under the Act, the refund of any amount becomes due, the Assessing Officer shall refund the amount without the assessee having to make any claim in their behalf. Under Section 244(1) of the Act, where a refund is due in pursuance of an order referred to in Section 240 of the Act and the Assessing Officer does not grant the refund within a period of 3 (three) months from the end of the month in which such order is passed, the Cent...
Binani Brothers Private Limited Vs. Collector of Customs and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-1991
Reported in: 1992(37)ECC29,1992LC443(Calcutta)
Susanta Chatterji, J.1. The present Rule was issued on 24.12.80 at the instance of the writ petitioner Messrs. Binani Brothers Private Limited, a Company having its registered office at No. 43, Strand Road, Calcutta praying inter alia for a Writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents not to impose additional duty and/or countervailing duty under Section 3(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 on the importation of non-ferrous metal scraps and not to demand and/or insist on furnishing of Bond and bank guarantee for payment of the Additional Duty and/or Countervailing Duty before clearance of the goods and further directing the respondents to release the bank guarantee and/or Bonds furnished in this behalf and also directing the respondents to refund the sum of Rs. 15,430.52p. in respect of which an application for refund dated 1.8.79 was made and other consequential reliefs. It is stated that the petitioner imports the scraps of zinc, lead, brass, copper, nickel, silver under Open General ...
Gouranga Lal Chatterjee Vs. Chief Engineer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-13-1991
Reported in: (1991)2CALLT259(HC)
Susanta Chatterji, J.1. The writ petition was moved on 4th of February, 1991 before N. K. Mitra J. and an ad interim order as prayed for was granted for a period of 2 (two) weeks. The matter subsequently appeared before this Bench on 10th of April, 1991 and the interim order of status quo as on that date was allowed to continue. The matter further appeared on 29.4.91 and this Court made it clear that the respondents may take all effective steps but there will be no issuance of the work order without the leave of the Court. It was further made clear that any step that would be taken by the respondents besides taking steps for issuance of the work order, will abide by the result of the writ petition. An application for addition of party was made by Messrs Larsen & Toubro Limited (ECC Construction Group) and prayed for vacating the interim order.2. The writ petitioner has prayed for a writ of Mandamus to command the respondents to rescind the impugned decision as not to award contract in ...
Shri Satya Dev Singh and ors. Vs. Indian Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. and o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-13-1991
Reported in: (1991)2CALLT450(HC)
Susanta Chatterji, J.1. The present writ petition has been filed by 175 persons claiming to be the members of the Central Co-ordination Committee of Associations of Railway Plotees-cum-Softcoke Licencees of Calcutta Railway Sidings, praying, inter alia, for an appropriate writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents not to withhold the supply of breeze coke to the petitioners as per the sponsorship made by the Director of Consumer Goods, Government of West Bengal.2. There is a further prayer for rescinding, cancelling and/or setting aside the impugned notices dated November 26, 1990 and February 22, 1991 (Annexures J and P) to the writ petition issued by the Indian Iron and Steel Company Limited being respondent No. 1.3. It is stated in details that the writ petitioners are carrying on business to supply breeze coke for domestic use. For such supply of breeze coke to the consumers the petitioners had to obtain licence from the Director of Consumer Goods, Government of West Bengal in ord...
i.C.i. India Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-13-1991
Reported in: 1992(60)ELT529(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J.1. The Petitioner placed an order on its parent Company, Imperial Chemical Industries, PIC, U.K. for supply of pump spare parts. On 27th June, 1982, the petitioner, in anticipation of the arrival of the goods, filed a Bill of Entry and on assessment paid a sum of Rs. 52,792.80. Thereafter on 30th August, 1982, a broken case containing some imported goods landed at Calcutta Port Trust. On 12th November, 1982, the Insurance survey was carried out by the Customs Shed Appraiser and the said survey revealed that the broken case contained some other materials. On 12th December, 1982 the petitioner abandoned the said broken case and the Dock Customs Authorities sent the said Bill of Entry to the Custom House. The Customs Authorities accepted the abandonment of the broken case by the petitioner on 28th January, 1983.2. These facts are not in dispute. The goods that the petitioner wanted to import did not arrive at Calcutta Port. As such, there was no question of payment of...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Park Hotel Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-09-1991
Reported in: [1993]200ITR122(Cal)
Ajit Sengupta, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1980-81, the following two questions of law have been referred to this court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal failed to take proper note of Clause VI of the deed of assignment dated September 3, 1966, and whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that, M/s. Park Hotel (P) Ltd. was not the owner of the superstructure built on the land at 15 Park Street, Calcutta-16, during the tenure of lease and that income arising therefrom should be assessed under the head 'Business' and not under the head ' House property' ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the income from electricity charges should be assessed under the head ' Business ' and not under the head 'Other sources' ?' 2. So far as the first question ...
Super Wire Industries Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-09-1991
Reported in: 1992(58)ELT429(Cal)
ORDERSuhas Chandra Sen, J.1. The petitioners are manufacturers of Super Enamelled Copper Winding Wire. During the manufacturing period in dispute the Modvat Scheme was in operation. The petitioners paid excise duty at the rate of 15 per cent by mistake whereas the duty was payable at the rate of 5 per cent. Becoming aware of the excess amount of the duty paid, the petitioners lodged a claim for refund. This claim was rejected by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise by an order dated 19th July, 1989. There was an appeal by the petitioners. The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) passed order dated 25th August, 1989 and allowed the appeal of the petitioners and directed as follows:-'I have considered the matter. The facts that the appellants were eligible for payment of duty @ 5% ad valorem during the material period under Notification No. 175/86-CE dated 1-3-1986, as amended, and that there were excess payments were not disputed by the Asstt. Collector. Rejection of refund was on...
Biswanath Ghosh Vs. the Administrator General of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-07-1991
Reported in: (1992)1CALLT134(HC),96CWN223
Ajay Nath Ray, J.1. This is an application for a renewal of a lease which is due to expire in 1997. Under the terms of the lease now existing the lessee has an option for renewal of the lease for another 41 years from the date of expiry. The clause for renewal is the tenth clause. Though no official translation has been annexed to the petition, as it should have been, I may state here that the said clause is an option for renewal one month prior to the expiry. In the normal course therefore, the renewal would be asked for in or about 1997. The lessee in this application has however, said that he would like to have a certainty of a renewal just now so that he may be in a position to invest money on the land and bring up a building as he is entitled to under the fourth clause of the lease.2. The prayer for renewal for 99 years has not been pressed before me because admittedly the renewal can be had for another 41 years only on the existing terms and conditions.3. It has not been disputed...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »