Kolkata Court April 1993 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.
State of West Bengal and ors. Vs. Dr. Anindya Gopal Mitra and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-10-1993
Reported in: (1993)1CALLT464(HC),97CWN587
ORDER1. The Court: There will be an order in terms of prayer (a) of the petition. Leave is given to the petitioner to stamp and punch the petition within one week after the reopening of the Court.2. An application has been made for the stay of the operation of the order passed by the learned trial Judge in the writ proceeding which has wended its way before us in appeal. No copy of the judgment delivered by the learned trial Judge has been produced before us save the operative portion of the judgment. Ordinarily, and except for compelling reasons, we should not grant stay of operation of any judicial order without having an opportunity to go through the order, in view of the holidays for which the High Court is closed, it has not been possible for us to arrange for production of the records from the trial Court.3. In view of an order promulgated under Section 144 of Criminal Procedure Code, the Bharatiya Janata Party applied to the Commissioner of Police for permission to hold the publ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Avery India Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-08-1993
Reported in: [1994]207ITR813(Cal)
Ajit K. Sengupta, J.1. In this reference, the following question has been referred to us by the Tribunal under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled to claim the amount of Rs. 13,28,450 as revenue expenditure ?'2. The matter relates to the assessment of the assessee for the assessment year 1982-83 for which the previous year ended on December 31, 1981.3. Shortly stated the facts are that the assessee-company derives income from manufacture and sale of weighing and testing machines, weights, etc. The Assessing Officer held that the payment of Rs. 13,28,450 was of capital nature since as per the terms of the agreement relating to the use of trademarks and patents and copyrights of the Revere Corporation, the assessee-company had full right to use them in India not only until the existence of the said agreement but also after the expiry or termination of the a...
Satrughna Adak Vs. Sonali Adak Nee Tung
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-08-1993
Reported in: 1993CriLJ1892,II(1993)DMC263
Amal Kanti Bhattacharji, J.1. This revisional application under Section 401 read with Section 482, Cr.P.C. is against an order of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Uluberia, rejecting an application filed by the petitioner for setting aside an ex parte order of maintenance under Section 126(2), Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate has rejected the application on the basis of a Division Bench judgment of this Court reported in Crimes (1988) 3 525 Amal Guha v. State of West Bengal. In the present case the opposite party wife filed an application under Section 125, Cr.P.C. claiming maintenance at the rate of Rs. 300/- per month against the husband-petitioner. The Magistrate served notice of the application on the husband which was at the first instance returned unserved. Subsequently fresh notice was sent by post and the Magistrate accepted the service as proper. As, however, the husband did not appear to contest the case, the same was heard ex parte after several adjournments, on 20.7.91...
Hiralal Banka and ors. Vs. Mr. P.S. Bose and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-08-1993
Reported in: 1995(1)ALT(Cri)7,(1993)2CALLT299(HC),98CWN396
G.R. Bhattacharjee, J.1. This revisional application has been filed for quashing the First Information Report (F.I.R.) dated the 27th June, 1989 in RC/9/SCB/89 Calcutta and all proceedings initiated thereunder in the Court of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (South), Alipore, Calcutta. The said First Information Report is Annexure-E to this revisional application. The F.I.R. was recorded at the Delhi Special Police Establishment, CBI, SCB, Calcutta branch on 27th June, 1989 Under Sections 120B/420/468/471 I.P.C. and Sections 277/278 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the basis of information reported in writing by one Sri P.S. Bose, Inspector of Police, CBI, SCB, Calcutta who also took up the investigation of the case as per order of the SP, CBI, SCB, Calcutta. In the formal part of the F.I.R. the name of the complainant has been noted as 'source' and the date and time of occurrence has been recorded as 'during the years 1985 and 1986'. Seven persons including the 4 petitione...
Dr. Anindya Mitra and anr. Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-08-1993
Reported in: (1993)1CALLT436(HC)
Shyamal Kumar Sen, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioners have challenged the order dated 31st March, 1993, issued by the Commissioner of Police, Calcutta, 'whereby the Commissioner regretted that permission cannot be accorded to the petitioners for holding a public meeting at Brigade Parade Ground on 11th April, 1993 by relaxing the prohibitory orders under Section 144 Cr.P.C. now in force in Calcutta.'2. It is the contention of the writ petitioner that the members of the petitioner No. 2 Bharatiya Janata Party are all citizens of India. The Constitution of the petitioner No. 2 admits all Indian Citizens in its fold irrespective of their caste, religion and any bias if they subscribe to the common ideals of the party.3. The said Bharatiya Janata Party is a political party recognised by the Election Commission of India in terms of its orders under the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 and have been given reserved symbols for its candidates contesting assembly and parliament elect...
Dr. Anindya Gopal Mitra and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-08-1993
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2096
ORDERShyamal Kumar Sen, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioners have challenged the order dated 31st March, 1993, issued by the Commissioner of Police, Calcutta, 'whereby the Commissioner regretted that permission cannot be accorded to the petitioners for holding a public meeting at Brigade Parade Ground on 11th April, 1993 by relaxing the prohibitory orders under Section 144 Cr. P.C. now in force in Calcutta.2. It is the contention of the writ petitioner that the members of the petitioner No. 2 Bharatiya Janata Party are all citizens of India. The Constitution of the petitioner No. 2 admits all Indian Citizens in its fold irrespective of their caste, religion and any bias if they subscribe to the common ideals of the party.3. The said Bharatiya Janata Party is a political party recognised by the Election Commission of India in terms of its orders under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and have been given reserved symbols for its candidates contesting assembly and parliame...
Muhammad RaisuddIn Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-07-1993
Reported in: AIR1993Cal262
ORDERA.M. Bhattacharjee, C.J. 1. By a Notification issued under the provisions of S. 3 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 Jammat-e-Islami Hind (hereinafter referred to as JEIH) has been declared to be an Unlawful Association and it has been further directed that the Notification shall have effect from the date of its publication in the Official Gazette being 10th December, 1992. The petitioner, professing to be thePresident of JEIH, has challenged the said Notification by a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution and the learned trial Judge has directed the parties concerned to file affidavits, but has, by a speaking order, declined to issue any interlocutory interdiction. The petitioner having felt aggrieved by the non-issuance of any interlocutory order by the learned trial Judge has moved us in appeal.2. Mr, Arun Prakash Chatterjee, the learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the petitioner/appellant, has made it clear that since the writ petition is awaiting dispos...
Bireswar Sarkar Vs. Gift-tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-07-1993
Reported in: [1997]223ITR404(Cal)
Ruma Pal, J. 1. In this writ application, the writ petitioner has challenged the notice issued under Section 16 of the Gift-tax Act, 1958 (referred to as 'the Act'). By the impugned notice, the Gift-tax Officer has sought to assess the petitioner under the Act in respect of the assessment year 1982-83.2. The respondents had disclosed their reasons recorded for the issuance of the impugned notice on December 1, 1987. In that notice, the Gift-tax Officer has said that by an agreement dated March 27, 1982, the petitioner had sold his business which he was carrying on under the name and style of 'B. Sarkar Johuri' to a private limited company known as B. Sarkar Johuree Private Limited. By that agreement, the petitioner was to receive a sum of Rs. 3,29,567.09 being the book value of the petitioner's assets from the company. It is further stated that the petitioner was 'interested from both sides' and that consequently the sale was made at a consideration less than the market price. Accordin...
Bireswar Sarkar Vs. Gift Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-07-1993
Reported in: (1997)139CTR(Cal)138
JudgementMRS. RUMA PAL, J. :In this writ application, the writ petitioner has challenged the notice issued under s. 16 of the GT Act, 1958 (referred to as 'the Act'). By the impugned notice, the GTO has sought to assess the petitioner under the Act in respect of the asst. yr. 1982-83.2. The respondents had disclosed their reasons recorded for the issuance of the impugned notice on 1st Dec., 1987. In that notice, the GTO has said that by an agreement dt. 27th March, 1982, the petitioner had sold his business which he was carrying on under the name and style of 'B. Sarkar Johuri' to a private limited company known as B. Sarkar Johuree Pvt. Ltd. By that agreement, the petitioner was to receive a sum of Rs. 3,29,567.09 being the book value of the petitioners assets from the company. It is further stated that the petitioner was 'interested from both sides' and that consequently the sale was made at a consideration less than the market price. According to the GTO, the value of assets over li...
Sm. Sukumari Debi and Another Vs. Shri Ramdas Ganguli
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-06-1993
Reported in: AIR1994Cal85,97CWN797
ORDER1. The instant revisional application by the plaintiff-petitioners under S. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against the order dated 2-8-77 passed by the learned Munsif, Second Court at Sealdah in T.S. No. 108 of 1975 before him allowing an application by the opposite party Nos. 2 and 3, Latika Banerjee and Gouri Mukherjee, under Order 1, Rule 10 of the Code for being added as co-plaintiffs therein.2. The plaintiffs-petitioners, as landlords, had filed the aforesaid relevant T. S. No. 108 of 1975 before the Court below for eviction of the tenant-defendant-opposite party No. 1, Ramdas Ganguli, from the suit premises on the ground of default in payment of rent in respect thereof since the month of Shraban, 1381 B.S., contending, inter alia, that he was a monthly tenant under them at a monthly rental of Rs. 145/- only, payable according to Bengali Calendar Month. The defendant-tenant had entered appearance in the suit and had filed written statement raising a plea of no...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »