Kolkata Court February 1995 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.
Hooghly River Bridge Commissioners Vs. Bhagirathi Bridge Construction ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-13-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Cal274
ORDER1. This matter arises out of an application under S. 30 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 wherein the petitioner, inter alia, has prayed for setting aside of an award dated 17-2-94 made and published by Mr. Debi-prosad Roychowdhury and Mr. Santosh Kumar Chandra, Joint Arbitrators, in a reference made to them in relation to the disputes and difference between the petitioner and the respondent No. 1 herein.2. The fact of the matter is as follows :--On or about 9-8-75 a contract was entered into by and between Calcutta Port Trust and the respondent No. 1, in terms whereof the respondent No. 1 was awarded the work of design, construction, completion and maintenance of the Second Hooghly Bridge, commonly known as Vidyasagar Setu. The said agreement was modified by three supplementary agreements all dated 16-9-77. The first supplementary agreement contained an arbitration clause providing for settlement of their disputes and differences in terms thereof. A fourth supplementary agreement was ...
In Re: Maknam Investments Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-13-1995
Reported in: [1996]87CompCas689(Cal)
Baboo Lall Jain, J. 1. This is an application made under sections 391(2) and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, for sanction of the scheme of amalgamation being annexure 'A' to the petition. The scheme envisages amalgamation of Maknam Investments Ltd. (hereinafter shortly referred to as 'Maknam') and Namtok Investments Ltd. (hereinafter shortly referred to as 'Namtok') being the two transferor companies with India Foils Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'IFL') being the transferee-company.2. The case of the petitioner is, inter alia, to the effect that Maknam has an issued, subscribed and paid-up capital of Rs. 15 crores. Namtok has a paid-up capital of Rs. 14,50,0'0,000. The transferee-company, i.e., IFL, has a paid-up capital of Rs. 6,66,88,980 divided into 66,68,898 equity shares of Rs. 10 each fully paid up.3. Pursuant to an order dated September 19, 1994, made by this court at the petition of the said transferee and transferor companies, meetings were held under the different chairmen...
Calcutta Industries and ors. Vs. the Regional Provident Fund Commissio ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-13-1995
Reported in: (1995)1CALLT419(HC),99CWN759,[1995(71)FLR575],(1996)IIILLJ814Cal
Nisith Kumar Batabyal, J.1. In the application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner company and its partners have come before this Court for the following, among other, reliefs :(a) A writ of and/or order and/or directions in the nature of mandamus commanding and/or directing the respondent and/or their agents and/ or their servants and/or each of them not to proceed further with criminal prosecutions as detailed in Annexure 'A' and not to initiate criminal proceedings in respect of the subsequent periods as per Annexure 'B' to the Writ petition under the provisions of Employees Provident Fund & Miscellenous Provisions Act,1952 and Employees Family Pension Scheme. 1975 and Employees Deposit Link Insurance Scheme. 1976 and Rules and Regulations framed thereunder ; (b) A Writ and/or directions in the nature of Mandamus do issue commanding the respondents from giving any effect or further effects to the criminal prosecution detailed in Annexure 'A'. (c) A Writ an...
Monordas Shah Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-13-1995
Reported in: (1995)2CALLT35(HC)
Shree Rang Misra, J.1. By means of this petition, petitioner seeks a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding respondent Nos. 2 to 4 in particular respondent No. 4 to act in accordance with law and to perform their statutory duties including the duties enjoned upon them under Section 23 of the Police Act, 1861 and to restrain the respondent Nos. 5 to 7 and their associates from illegally obstructing, disturbing and interfering with the petitioner's lawful rights to carry on the business from his office-cum-enquiry centre situated on the first floor of the premises No. 9, S.N. Banerjee Road, Calcutta and also a writ directing the respondent No. 4 the Officer-in-Charge, Taltala Police Station to carry out the order passed by the Executive Magistrate and Metropolitan Magistrate whereby the respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 were directed not to create any obstruction to the petitioner and his partner and employees from carrying on the business from his office-cum-enquiry centre.2. Brief fac...
Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs. Santosh Kumar Joardar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-10-1995
Reported in: (1995)1CALLT472(HC),(1996)IIILLJ808Cal
A.K. Dutta, J.1. This Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 21st December, 1992 passed by a Learned Single Judge of this Court in Civil Order No. 1472 (W) of 1991, allowing the Writ Petition filed by the Writ Petitioner-Respondent No. 1 (Hereinafter referred to as petitioner) for the reasons recorded therein.2. The Petitioner had filed the relevant Writ Petition praying for 'a writ in the nature of mandamus and/ or order and/or a direction of like nature commanding the respondents to forbear from giving any effect or further effect to the decision of determination of the date of birth of the petitioner asNovember 29, 1993, as communicated in the letter being No,PL-III/4-J(91)/1639 dated June 13, 1989 and being No. PL-III/4-J(91)/3086 dated September, 26, 1989, both issued by the Deputy Manager (Pers.) Exe. of Durgapur Steel Plant being Annexures 'E' and 'J' respectively to this application, and / or from taking any action for superannuation of the petitioner on the ba...
Dhandhania Bros. (P.) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-09-1995
Reported in: (1995)53ITD391(Kol.)
1. In the assessment made Under Section 143(1)(a), the Assessing Officer added back a sum of Rs. 3,65,587 as prima facie adjustment.This amount consisted of the following : The aforesaid disallowance was made Under Section 43B of the Act on the ground that there was no evidence for payment.2. The assessee thereafter submitted a petition Under Section 154 of the Act for rectification of the assessment. It was claimed that the aforesaid amount was paid within the period mentioned in the First Proviso to Section 43B and that the audit certificate dated 27-11-1990 which was filed along with the return of income constituted the evidence for the payment A copy of the aforesaid certificate was also filed along with the application Under Section 154. Copies of the receipts dated 26-4-1990 and 25-7-1990 evidencing the sales-tax payment were also enclosed to the application for rectification. On the basis of these certificates and receipts it was claimed that the assessment made Under Section 1...
G.V.S. Packaging P. Ltd. Vs. Vinode Textile Industries P. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-09-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Cal260,(1995)1CALLT413(HC)
ORDER1. This is an application under S. 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 for stay of a winding up proceedings pending before the Company Court. The winding up proceeding was instituted by the respondents for failure of the petitioner in paying rents amounting to Rs. 92,000/- to the respondents.2. The petitioner's case in short is that an indenture of lease dated 28th February, 1986 was executed and registered between the petitioner on the one hand and the respondent on the other for lease of a premises for 20 years at a monthly premium of Rs. 11500/ -and Rs. 1 lakh being deposited as a security deposit by the lessee with the lessor which is not to carry any interest and refundable at or on termination of the tenancy between the parties. The petitioner's case is that this is a premises tenancy and by virtue of S. 5 of the Premises Tenancy Act as to consideration can pass for creation of premises tenancy, there was a violation which is to be visited with penalty under S. 30 of the Act, th...
Tapas Mondal and ors. Vs. Eastern Coalfields Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-09-1995
Reported in: (1997)IIILLJ1066Cal
ORDERSatyabrata Sinha, J.1. In all these applications, a common question of law has been raised, and as such, these applications are being disposed of together.2. The petitioners are workmen working in Kalidaspur Colliery belonging to Eastern Coalfields Limited, which is a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. The contentions of the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that there has been violation of the principles of natural justice, in as much as, in some matters, documents asked for by them in the departmental proceedings have not been furnished. Further contention of the learned Counsel is that the petitioners are going to be dismissed from service without supplying copies of the enquiry reports submitted to the disciplinary authority by the Enquiry Officer, which is mandatory, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court of India in the case of Managing Director, ECIL, Hyderabad v. B. Karunakar, reported in (1994-I-LLJ-162), and the decision in th...
S.T.P. Limited Vs. First Industrial Tribunal of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-08-1995
Reported in: (1995)2CALLT271(HC),1995LabIC1517,(1996)IILLJ584Cal
Nisith Kumar Batabyal, J. 1. The writ petitioner-company is engaged in the manufacture and sale of coal tar, petroleum products, water proofing, and damp proofing belts etc. etc. The respondent No. 2 Smt. Sushila Gayen was never employed by the petitioner but was an employee of a licensed Contractor of the petitioner, named Shri Kanu Ganguli of Basudebpur, Triveni Dist. Hooghly in connection with the work undertaken by the petitioner at Bandel Thermal Power Plant at Hooghly. The respondent No. 2 was never paid any wages by the petitioner for any work done by her at the said Plant. A criminal case was started against her on the ground of theft of materials from the said Thermal Power Plant when she was caught red-handed by the security guards of the said Plant while she was working as a workman of the Contractor mentioned above. Ultimately she was acquitted from that case. Before acquittal in the case respondent No. 2 wrote to the petitioner company requesting for re-employment with bac...
Beni Madhab Poddar Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-08-1995
Reported in: (1996)1CALLT36(HC),(1996)IILLJ589Cal
Shree Rang Misra, J. 1. Inspite of receipt of notice the answering respondents have not filed any affidavit-in-oppo-sition. As such the petition is heard and disposed of on merit. By means of this writ petition petitioner challenges a notice for initiating disciplinary proceeding No. 25 dated June 24, 1988 initiated by the Commissioner of Police, respondent No. 2. The brief facts giving rise to this writ petition are as follows: 2. The petitioner was a Sub-Inspector of Police. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner being proceeding No. 52 dated June 24, 1988 initiated by the Commissioner of Police, respondent No. 2 vide Annexure 'B' to the writ petition. In the meantime, petitioner admittedly has retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on October 31, 1991 vide D.O. No. 1096 dated October 31, 1991. Petitioner alleges that during this long period of 39 years petitioner's services were appreciated and commended by the Higher Officials. It has be...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »