Kolkata Court November 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.
NitIn V. Bhimani and anr. Vs. A.R. Basu
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-22-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ1974
ORDERNripendra Kumar Bhattacharyya, J.1. By this revision the petitioners have challenged the initial order of taking cognizance being order dated 4th Oetober, 1991 passed in Case No. C/417/91 under Section 120B/420 and 420 of the IPC as passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 8th Court, Calcutta, and all orders subsequent to that order.2. The short background of the case is that the Constituted Attorney of Makum Tea Company (India) Limited, Namdang House, lodged a complaint against the petitioners herein for an offence under Section 120B/420 and 420 of the IPC on certain allegations before the court of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 8th Court, Calcutta. The complaint was registered there as Case No. C/417/91. The learned Magistrate examined the complainant and then on a finding that there are sufficient grounds for proceeding against the persons viz. the present petitioners, ordered for issuance of process under Section 120B/420 and 420 of the IPC and thereafter in view o...
Allahabad Bank Workers' Union and Ors. Vs. Union of India (UOi) and Or ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-17-1994
Reported in: (1996)IIILLJ182Cal
Altamas Kabir, J.1. These two matters have been taken up for final hearing together as the same set of facts are involved in both the matters, although the reliefs prayed for are different. The application made on the Appellate Side is prior in point of time and the petitioners therein are the trade union and its office bearers representing one set of daily rate peons employed by the United Industrial Bank which was subsequently merged with Allahabad Bank. The petitioners in the other writ application are another trade union and its General Secretary representing some of the other daily rated employed by the erstwhile United Industrial Bank.2. In order to appreciate the questions which have been posed in these two applications, it was necessary to briefly set out the facts leading to reconciliation proceedings which ended in a reference to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Calcutta, being Reference No. 21 of 1990 and award passed therein on May 15, 1992.3. According to the pet...
Mohan Lal Pandit Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-15-1994
Reported in: 1995(77)ELT57(Cal)
Ruma Pal, J.1. The petitioner who has been carrying on the business is a Customs House Clearing Agent being licensed to do so issued under the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 1984 (referred to as the Regulations) has challenged the revocation of his Licence by the Collector of Customs. The impugned order is dated 19-8-1994 and has been issued under the Regulations 21 (b) (c) read with Regulation 23(7) of the Regulations for violation of Regulations 14(d), (e), (1) and 28(7) by the petitioner.2. The ground for challenge is that the impugned order has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and Regulation 23.3. The incident in respect of which the petitioner's Licence has been revoked took place in February, 1994. The allegation of the Customs Authorities is that the petitioner in conspiracy with the exporter had attempted to illegally export rough sandalwood by misdeclaring the same to be 'machine finished knife handles made of sandalwood' and 'refuse f...
Calcutta Goods Transport Association and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-14-1994
Reported in: [1996]219ITR486(Cal)
Ruma Pal, J. 1. The issue involved in this writ petition is whether common carriers of goods by road are liable to deduction of tax at source under Section 194C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. Petitioner No. 1 is a registered society representing goods carriers and transporters in the State of West Bengal. According to the petitioners, the members of petitioner No. 1 are common carriers of goods. Except for transporting goods, such members do not carry out any other work in connection with the goods transported such as loading and unloading of the goods, 3. Section 194C of the Act was introduced in 1972. Briefly stated, Section 194C provides for the deduction of two per cent. on account of income-tax on the income comprised in payments made to contractors and subcontractors 'for carrying out any work (including supply of labour for carrying out any work) in pursuance of a contract between the contractor' and specified concerns or authorities.4. On...
Surendra Nath Kundu, Being Dead, His Heirs and Legal Representatives-- ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-11-1994
Reported in: (1995)1CALLT141(HC)
Bijitendra Mohan Mitra, J.1. The instant revisional application is directed against Order No. 77 dated 3.6.94 passed by the learned Judge, Third Bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta, in Title Suit No. 162 of 1977 rejecting an application under Order 22 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In the said suit the plaintiff died on 10.7.84. During the pendency thereof and subsequent to the plaintiff's death a petition was filed in the Trial Court under Order 22 Rule 3 simpliciter of the Code of Civil Procedure. Against an order passed on the said parent application the matter came up to this Hon'ble Court and a learned Single Judge has passed an order in C.O. No. 20 of 1990 whereby the learned Judge has allowed conversion of the petition under Order 22 Rule 3 of the Code as one under Order 22 Rule 9 of the Code but subject to the rider clause that the same shall not be without any addition. The petition as already filed in the Trial Court as read appears to be a petition under Order 22 Rule ...
Omraomal Goyal Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-10-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2611
ORDERGitesh Ranjan Bhattacharjee, J.1. in this revisional application under Section 482 Cr. P.C. read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed for quashing the investigation started in Bhacti-nagar P.S. Case 165/94 under Section 7(1) (a) (ii) of the Essential Commodities Act and also for quashing the confiscation proceeding started under Section 6A of the said Act being E. C. Case No. 8/2 94-95 pending before the Collector under the E. C. Act, Jalpaiguri.2. The petitioner has challenged the police investigation on the ground that the first information report on the basis of which the police investigation has been started does not disclose any cognizable offence. The FIR was lodged by DEB Inspector(s), Jalpaiguri on 2-8-94 at 01.25 hours. The gist of the FIR is noted hereunder. The DEB Officers, on receipt of secret source information, approached, under the direct supervision of the Dy. S. P. DEB Jalpaiguri, the main gate of Nava Bharat Flour Roller Mill s...
Shree Hanuman Jute Mills Ltd. and anr. Vs. Central Warehousing Corpn. ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-09-1994
Reported in: (1995)1CALLT133(HC)
Satyabrata Sinha, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.2. The petitioners in this application have, inter alia, prayed for issuance of a Writ of or in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to revise and fix the rent payable in respect of the godown of the petitioners let out to the respondent No. 1, purported to be in terms of the directions and/ or guidelines issued by the respondent No. 3 as contained in Annexure 'A' to the writ application.3. The case of the petitioners is that an agreement was entered into between the petitioner No. 1 and the respondent No. 1 to enhance the rent subject to the condition that the petitioner No. 1 effects necessary repairs to the tenanted premises.4. The respondent No. 1 in its affidavit in opposition has clearly stated that the purported directions as contained in Annexure 'A' to the writ application are not binding upon it in so far as it is not a department of the Central Government. I...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›