Kolkata Court April 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.
Mulchand Agarwalla Vs. K.C. Kanungo and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-15-1994
Reported in: (1994)2CALLT283(HC),99CWN277
Arun Kumar Dutta, J.1. A question of law of the first impression raised in this proceedings is : whether a direction issued by the High Court upon a subordinate Court to dispose of a case within a specified period is mandatory or directory; and whether failure/neglect to comply therewith makes the subsequent proceedings a nullity. The aforesaid question arises in the following facts and circumstances:2. The petitioner-accused Mulchand Agarwalla (hereinafter referred to as accused) has been prosecuted, along with others, for having allegedly entered into criminal conspiracy with each other, and in pursuance of the said conspiracy cheating the Railway Department by despatching eight wagons of steel plates and steel plate cuttings from Chittaranjan against bogus R.R. and Forwarding Notes between the period from 23.9.69 to 15.10.70 in the names of different firms, alleged to be bogus ones, and thereby committing offences punishable under Sections 120B/420/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code, ...
Bakul Ch. Singh Vs. Asst. Secretary, Govt. of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-13-1994
Reported in: 98CWN1063,(1995)ILLJ1171Cal
Aloke Chakraborty, J. 1. Heard Mr. Ghosh for the writ petitioner and Miss Das for the respondents.2. Miss Das communicated to the Court that the records of the case could not be produced by her client's officers and to that effect she got instruction.3. The case of the petitioner in brief is that he belongs to Scheduled Caste Community having a valid certificate and is a physically handicapped person. He has no legs below knee. The petitioner states that he read upto class VIII and his name was enrolled with the District Employment Exchange at Lalbagh, Murshidabad and is renewed from time to time from June 1, 1968. The petitioner was engaged as Pankha Puller in regular vacancy in the office of the Block Development Officer, Bhagwangola II Murshidabad and he rendered service as Pankha Puller in the said Block upto October 31, 1972.The petitioner states that it was a seasonal job and he used to be engaged for a few months in each year. Annexure M to the writ petition shows that the petit...
Raj Kumar Dey Vs. Subhas Chandra Dey and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-13-1994
Reported in: (1994)2CALLT92(HC),98CWN1084
Samir Kumar Mookherjee, J.1. This matter is treated as on day's list upon notice to the learned advocates, appearing for the contesting parties, who are present in Court at the time of delivery of judgment.2. The present appeal is directed against Order No. 57, dated 7th January, 1994, passed in Title Suit No. 122 of 1991, by the learned Judge, Third Bench, City Civil Court, allowing an application for injunction, made on behalf of the plaintiff, in part. The plaintiff is the appellant before us.2a. Since, on behalf of the necessary party-respondents, caveats had been lodged and since we felt that the appeal and the application, for effective disposal, should be heard and disposed of together, we heard out the appeal and the application dispensing with all formalities. We keep on record that the appearing parties before us signified their no objection to the said procedure. We admit the appeal and take up the same with application for leaving and disposal.3. The appellant and responden...
Md. Rashid Khan Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-13-1994
Reported in: 1994CriLJ2699
ORDERShyamal Kumar Sen, J.1. In the instant writ petition the petitioner has challenged the validity and propriety of the cognizance taken by the Designated Court constituted Under Section 9 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the TADA Act) presided over by the learned Judge 12th Bench of the City Civil Court, Calcutta of the case arising out of Section H (Bowbazar P.S.) Case No. 84 dated March 17, 1993. The petitioner has also prayed for declaration that the said cognizance taken as also all subsequent proceedings relating thereto to be illegal, void and inoperative in law. In the instant writ petition the provisions of the said TADA Act have also been challenged as ultra vires the Constitution of India. Since, however, the vires of the said statute which has been challenged in the instant writ petition it was also the subject matter of a proceeding pending in the Supreme Court of India, in the case of Kartar Singh v. State of P...
S.B. International Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Director General of Foreign Trade
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-11-1994
Reported in: 1994(74)ELT210(Cal)
Paritosh Kumar Mukherjee, J.1. This writ petition was moved on behalf of the petitioners M/s. S.B. International Limited and another, inter alia, praying for issue of a Writ in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the respondents to withdraw, cancel and/or rescind the instructions/directions, contained in the communication dated October 19, 1992 and to issue advance licences to the petitioner No. 1 for the remaining amounts, pursuant to the five applications, referred to in Annexure 'D' to the writ petition, by applying the norms, as prevailing on the dates of filing of the said applications and to act in accordance with law.2. The writ petition comes up for final hearing before me after completion of affidavits, on several dates.3. Facts stated in the instant writ petition are as follows :-The petitioner No. 1 is a Public Limited Company, within the meaning of Companies Act, 1956. The petitioner No. 2 is the Director of the petitioner No. 1 company. Most of the share-holders of the peti...
Central Coalfields Ltd. Vs. Ranital Transport
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-08-1994
Reported in: (1994)2CALLT1(HC)
Nisith Kumar Batabyal, J.1. These two applications in connection with matters coming under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act arising out of two appeals are taken up together. In Special Suit No. 72 of 1991, the plaintiff/respondent alleged that they were entitled to several claims for being adjudicated upon by way of arbitration. The application was filed in respect of six different contracts corresponding to different work orders. The transactions relating to the said contracts were different and the arbitration agreement pertaining to the said Work Orders and contracts were clubbed together for a single reference. The other appeal arises out of Special Suit No. 73 of 1991 in which an application was filed in respect of four different contracts corresponding to four different Work Orders. The transactions relating to the said four contracts were different and the arbitration agreement pertaining to the said Work Orders and Contracts were clubbed together for a single reference.2. Purs...
B.C. Saha Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-08-1994
Reported in: (1994)1CALLT419(HC)
Nisith Kumar Batabyal, J.1. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order passed on 8th April, 1986 by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Award Case No. 535 of 1985 and Matter No. 1565 of 1985, the appellant has preferred this appeal.2. Pursuant to an invitation of Tender for construction of reservoir for Darjeeling Water Supply Improvement Scheme, Messrs. B.C. Saha submitted a Tender which was accepted by the State Government and the parties entered into an agreement which contained an arbitration clause. Messrs. B.C. Saha made an application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 which was registered as Special Suit No. 55 of 1983 when dispute and differences arose between the parties for referring the disputes to the Arbitrator named in the Arbitration Clause. There was an order for filing the Arbitration Agreement in due course and the point of dispute was confined to the fact whether the Superintending Engineer had sanctioned a sum of Rs. 15,15,295.91...
Surendra Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Calcutta Municipal Corpn. and Other ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-07-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Cal26,99CWN324
ORDER1. In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner has challenged the determination of annual value in respect of the premises No. 1 Shakespeare Sarani, Calcutta for the period commencing 4th Quarter 1984-85.The main ground of challenge is that in determining the annual value no reasons have been disclosed by the Authorities as to how the valuation was arrived at.The impugned determination is as follows:--'Form No. A 34THE CALCUTTA MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONAssessment DepartmentStatement of Details of ValuationGeneralIntermediate Re-valuation with effect from the 4th Quarter of 84-85 Premises 1, Shakespeare Sarani 2,70,000/-tax Decided 2,70,000 x 12 32,40,000 Less 10%3,24,000 29,16,000/- Av. (Rs. Twentynine Lakhs Sixteen Thousand only) Sd/- Illegible 23-11-90Municipal Office : Assessing InspectorIncharge.23rd Nov. 1990 Sd/- Itlegible 23-11-90 Deputy Assessor Checked and found correct.Assistant Sd/- Illegible 23-11-90 Assessing Inspector.'2. At the hearing Mr. J...
Ramkrishan Shaw Vs. Smt. Lachmania Devi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-07-1994
Reported in: (1994)2CALLT67(HC)
Susanta Chatterji, J.1. The present application for review and/or reconsidera- of the order dated 9th September 1986 passed by the Division Bench consisting of two learned Judges in disposing Civil Rule No. 741 of 1979 has been filed supported by an affidavit sworn on 24th March, 1987.2. Since one of the learned judges constituted the bench in disposing Civil Rule 741 of 1979 has since been retired, this matter has appeared before this bench who was the other Judge in disposing Rule No. 741 of 1979. It transpires from the materials on record that a revisional application was filed challenging the judgment and/or order dated 12.12.1978 passed by the learned Additional District Judge at Barasat, 24-Parganas in Misc. Appeal 421 of 1974 arising out of order dated 20.5.1974 passed by the learned Munsif, 1st Court at Barasat in Misc. No. 232 of 1972. The revisional application related to an appellate order in a pre-emption proceeding under Section 24 of the West Bengal Non-agricultural Tenan...
Bridge and Building Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CemIndia Co. Ltd. a ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-06-1994
Reported in: AIR1994Cal219,(1994)2CALLT7(HC),[1995]84CompCas514(Cal)
ORDER1. This application has been made by Bridge and Building Construction Co., under Section 41 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, inter alia for orders as follows--(a) An order of injunction be passed restraining the respondents and/or their servants and/or agents from encashing the Bank Guarantee bearing No. 23/30 dated 25-5-1993;(b) Injunction restraining the respondent No. 1 from taking any step and/or any further step pursuant to the letter dated 5th January, 1994 addressed to the respondent No. 2 a copy whereof is already part of Annexure 'Q';(c) Injunction restraining the respondent No. 1 from trying to invoke the Bank Guarantee bearing No. 19/93 dated 28th April, 1993 for Rs. 5,40,000/-.2. Originally when the application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 was moved, the Bank of Baroda and OrientialBank of Commerce were also made as respondents Nos. 2 and 3. On 7-1-94 when the application was moved, the learned Advocate on behalf of the petitioner inter alia submitted tha...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »