Kolkata Court January 1994 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.
Shri Lakshmi Kanta Mandal Vs. Minor Achintya Mandal and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-31-1994
Reported in: AIR1994Cal227,98CWN725
ORDER1. This revisional application has been directed against the Order No. 64 dated 12-11-1992, passed by the Id. Munsif, Ram-purhat, in Title Suit No. 260 of 1992 disposing of five applications by the order under challenge.2. To decide the controversy, a brief and important synopsis of the factual exposure of the case is an inevitability which paves the way for appreciation. It is needless to repeat, that the petitioner revisionist filed five applications, although the relief sought for was not identical in all the applications. Of the five applications, the petitioner-revisionist has assailed the order passed in connection with three petitions challenging the refusal to correct the figure of Exhibits, examination of Dr. Swapan Kr Nag and admission of almanac into evidence. In the perspective of the aforesaid claim made by the petitioner-revisionist, I deal with the first controversy about the marking of the exhibits, the prayer of the petitioner-revisionist which, however, stood rej...
Pranab Hazra Vs. Ratna Hazra
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-31-1994
Reported in: II(1994)DMC651
S.K. Mukherjee, J.1. The short question, which has been urged before us, on behalf of the contesting parties to a proceeding for divorce, is whether in connection with an appeal, arising out of a matrimonial suit, instituted by the husband on the grounds of cruelty and desertion, which stood dismissed, an application for divorce by mutual consent is maintainable before the Appellate Court. On behalf of the appellant it has been residing seperately for a period of more than one year and since there has been a mutual agreement that the marriage should be dissolved, the Appellate Court is under an obligation to grant dissolution on such application, on fulfilment of the conditions laid down in Sub-section (2) of Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act. It is to be noted that the application before this Court is a joint application and has been preferred by both the husband and wife.2. Judgment of the Trial Court under appeal before this Court reveals (a) that a previous matrimonial suit, i...
East India Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-1994
Reported in: 1994(71)ELT358(Cal)
Ajoy Nath Ray, J.1. The petitioner challenges in this writ application the order of the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, dated 23-6-1993 wherein he disallowed the claim for exemption for the cough syrup 'Kafbin' claimed by the petitioner to be an Ayurvedic medicine and thus coming within the scope of an exemption notification.2. The claim for exemption made by the petitioner arises in this way.3. Under Tariff Item 3003.10 of Chapter 30 of the Tariff Act of 1985 the following entry appears :-'Heading Sub-heading Description of goods Rate ofNo. No. duty1 2 3 430.03 3003.10 Patent or proprietary medicaments 15%other than those medicaments which areexclusively Ayurvedic, Unani, Siddha, Homoeopathic or Bio-chemic'.4. It will be seen from the above item that medicaments which are exclusively Ayurvedic are not within the said Tariff entry.5. Furtheron there is Item 3003.30 which reads as follows in the said Tariff Act:-3003.30 Medicaments, including those used in Ayurvedic, 15%Unani, Sidd...
Kallol Kumar Mukherjee and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-1994
Reported in: (1994)2CALLT43(HC)
Gitesh Ranjan Bhattacharjee, J.1. The Criminal Revision No. 3 of 1991 relates to FIR No. 29 dated 20-6-87 of Jamuria P.S. On 20-6-87 at about 22.15 hours one Bijoy Kumar, Sub-Inspector of Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) camp at Kunustoria, P.S. Jamuria lodged a written complaint with the officer-in-charge, Jamuria Police Station, Dist. Burdwan alleging that on 19/20-6-87 while he along with CISF party, Kunustoria camp were on patrol duty for guarding against illegal trade/ transportation of coal, they at about 00.30 hours noticed near Chanda More on P. T. Road that the truck bearing no. WBG 4729, loaded with coal was proceeding towards Calcutta from Asansol side. The truck was stopped by the CISF party and 4 persons were found to be there in the truck including driver. The driver on being asked to produce relevant documents in support of the loaded coal stated that the documents were with the owner of the coal who was following behind. Since after waiting for sometime none app...
Bhupendra Lal Sen Vs. the State and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-1994
Reported in: (1994)1CALLT334(HC)
Ruma Pal, J.1. The petitioner was a member of the respondent-society. In 1966, the society conveyed by a registered deed of conveyance dated 25th July, 1966, tank and garden lands to the petitioner in consideration for payment of a sum of Rs. 7,700/-. The petitioner applied to the respondent- municipality for mutation of his name in respect of the holding No. 115. The application of the petitioner was rejected by the Chairman of the respondent-municipality on the ground that the petitioner's prayer could not be considered in view of an objection against mutation of the petitioner's name without obtaining the consent from the respondent-society. The petitioner has accordingly filed this writ application and has challenged such refusal of the municipality. According to the petitioner, it is no part of the respondent-municipal authority's duties to go into any question of title. In any event, the petitioner had absolute title as he had purchased the premises in question by a registered de...
Amrit Bottlers (P.) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-20-1994
Reported in: (1994)49ITD1(Kol.)
1. By this misc. application the assessee has required the Tribunal to amend its order dated 30-4-1991 under the provisions of Section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. We have heard Sri P.R.P. Verma, the learned counsel of the assessee and Sri S.C. Sen, the learned senior departmental representative. We have also perused the order of the Tribunal dated 30-4-1991. The paper book filed by the assessee's counsel on 8-7-1991 on which the assessee's counsel has heavily relied on was also gone through.3. On careful consideration of the arguments advanced by both the sides and the records available to us, we do not find any merit in the misc.application filed by the assessee. We also find that the paper book filed by the assessee on 8-7-1991 was not filed before the Tribunal during the course of hearing the appeal. Since the Tribunal has passed its order on the basis of arguments advanced by both the sides during the course of hearing the appeal as well as on the basis of the records av...
Amrit Bottlers (P) Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-20-1994
Reported in: (1994)48TTJ(Cal)680
ORDERN. PACHUAU, A. M. : July, 1991By this miscellaneous application the assessee has required the Tribunal to amend its order dt. 30th April, 1991 under the provisions of S. 254(2) of the IT Act, 1961.2. We have heard Sri P. R. P. Verma, the learned counsel of the assessee, and Sri S. C. Sen, the learned Senior Departmental Representative. We have also perused the order of the Tribunal dt. 30th April, 1991. The paper book filed by the assessees counsel on 8th July, 1991. On which the assessees counsel has heavily relied on was also gone through.3. On careful consideration of the arguments advanced by both the sides and the records available to us, we do not find any merit in the miscellaneous application filed by the assessee. We also find that the paper book filed by the assessee on 8th July, 1991, was not filed before the Tribunal during the course of hearing the appeal. Since the Tribunal has passed its order on the basis of arguments advanced by both the sides during the course of...
Kishan Kumar Daga Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-19-1994
Reported in: 1994(71)ELT354(Cal)
Ajoy Nath Ray, J.1. The petitioner imported a consignment of glass beads in September, 1992 and the first assessed duty of Rs. 14,990.32 was paid on 18-9-1992.2. On that day the goods were examined. Thereafter a show-cause notice was served upon the petitioner on the 18th of March, 1993. The endorsement on the reverse of the bill of entry merely mentions the absence of perforations in the glass beads and thus a doubt was endorsed that those are not glass beads but something else.3. In the show-cause notice a big claim was made, alleging that the consignment was valued some Rs. 20 lakh more than declared. The show-cause notice was duly replied to. The date of personal hearing was fixed for 30-7-93. The Collector of Customs was too busy to hear the matter on that day. He has not found time to revert to it since, although the petitioner was notified in writing that the next date of hearing would be intimated.4. In the case reported in : 1989(39)ELT538(Bom) (Starlite Corporate, Bombay v. U...
Assistant Collector of Customs Vs. East Anglia Plastics (India) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-18-1994
Reported in: 1994(74)ELT29(Cal)
Prabir Kumar Majumdar, J.1. The appellant has preferred this appeal from the judgment and order dated 19th March, 1990 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in the matter No. 480 of 1987 allowing the application of the respondent company under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. By the said application under Article 226 of the Constitution the respondents prayed for a direction upon the concerned respondent authorities for considering the refund applications contained in Annexure 'C' to the Writ Petition to grant refund of the countervailing or Additional Duty of Customs, which according to the respondents were wrongfully or illegally realised.3. The case of the respondent-writ petitioner is that the respondent company (the petitioner No. 1 before the trial Court) is the manufacturer of Phthalate Plasticizers and for the manufacture of the said Plasticizers the respondent company required as raw materials, inter alia, certain industrial alcohol known as '2 Ethyl Hesano...
Soumitra Panda Vs. A.K. Agarwal and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-17-1994
Reported in: AIR1994Cal165,(1994)1CALLT263(HC),98CWN393
ORDER1. None appears.2. Today the matter has appeared for order. It appears that after filing of the application for review the Stamp Reporter endorsed on 29-7-93 that the review application has been filed without being affirmed and with a direction for the return of the same to the learned Advocate for presentation. On the next day, being 30-7-93 the Stamp Reporter revised the endorsement on the statement of the learned Advocate recorded by him that no new fact has been taken by him in the reviewapplication and as such no further action as to affirmation of the application is required.3. This is an application for review within the provisions of Order 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Order 47, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure contemplate review as an application and Rule 3 thereof envisages form of an application for review. It is pertinent to mention in this context that S. 124 of the Limitation Act prescribes the period of limitation of an application for review. Chapter 4 of...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »