Kolkata Court August 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.
Wealth-tax Officer Vs. Bobita Choraria
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-31-1995
Reported in: (1996)56ITD182(Kol.)
1. These are five appeals filed by the department. The assessment years involved are 1979-80 to 1983-84.2. As common issue is involved in these appeals, we dispose of all these appeals by a common order for the sake of convenience.3. These appeals are marked late by 12 days. The last date for filing these appeals ended on 2-10-1992 whereas the appeals were actually filed on 14-10-1992 resulting in a delay of 12 days. We have perused the condonation petition filed by the revenue along with the appeals.We are satisfied that the delay is due to reasonable cause as explained in the petition. The delay is condoned and we admit the appeals.4. The assessee Sri Mahendra Kr. Choraria is an individual (since deceased and now represented by the legal heir Smt. Bobita Choraria).The assessee along with three others jointly purchased a plot of land measuring 1697.29 sq. mtrs. at 5B, Abdul Gaffar Khan Road, Bombay on 29-10-1971. The co-owners jointly started construction of residential house on the ...
In Re: Smt. Krishna Sengupta and anr. Vs. Smt. Monjula Mukherjee and a ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-31-1995
Reported in: (1996)1CALLT46(HC),I(1996)DMC270
Nripendra Kumar Bhattacharyya, J.1. Nripendra Kumar Bhattacharyya, J.-Heard the submission of the learned Advocate for the petitioners, Miss Minoti Gomes appearing with the learned Advocate Mr. Sariful Islam Mallick. Considered the materials on record.2. It appears that this revisional application can be disposed of without directing the petitioners to serve copies of this application alongwith notice upon the Opposite Parties.3. The fact leading to this revisional application is that originally the elder brother of the wife made an application under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure alleging that the husband of his sister contracted a second marriage during the subsistence of the marriage of the accused with his sister. Cognizance was taken by the learned Magistrate. Summons were issued against the accused husband but ultimately when it was brought to the notice of the learned Magistrate that a petition of complaint by the elder brother of the wife is not maintainable and ...
Dipak Sikdar Vs. the State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-31-1995
Reported in: (1996)1CALLT246(HC)
Nripendra Kumar Bhattacharyya, J.1. By this revision under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Cr. P.C., one of the accused persons has challenged the orders dated 20.5.94 and 28.6.94 passed in CR. Case No. 203/94 by the Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalpaiguri. 2. By order dated 20.5.94, the Ld. Magistrate, inter alia, directed issuance of notice upon the accused Dipak Sikdar, Secretary of the association, who is the present revisionist, to produce the documents as stated in the petition within seven days from the date of receipt of the summons. From the order dated 28.6.94 it appears that the accused persons made an application for recalling the notice as was directed to serve by order dated 20.5.84 upon the revisionist Under Section 91 of the Cr. P. C. and by the said order, the Ld. Magistrate rejected the petition and directed for production of the documents by accused No. 2, meaning the present revisionist and also for appearance of all the accused persons. Those two orders ...
S.K. Abdur Rahim Vs. Amal Kr. Banerjee and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-31-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ555
ORDERN.K. Bhattacharya, J.1. By this revision, the accused petitioner has challenged order dated 22-6-94 passed by the Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate, 10th Court, Calcutta in Case No. C/260/91 Under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1981.2. The fact leading to this case is that upon a complaint of one Amal Kr. Banerjee against the accused petitioner for an offence Under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1981, Complaint Case No. C-260/91 has been registered in the Court of the Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate, 10 Court Calcutta. In course of the proceeding, the accused petitioner made an allegation by filing an objection that over the self-same incident, a police case is pending and the Ld. Magistrate by his order dated 11-12-91 in exercise of his power Under Section 210(1) of the Cr. P. C. stayed the proceeding, called for a report from the investigating authority and fixed 18-1-92 for submission of the report by the investigating authority in the police case. 18-1 -9...
Nilkanta Kolay Vs. the Official Liquidator
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-30-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Cal171
ORDER1. This application had been filed by one Nilkanta Kolay on 20th January, 1992 under Section 466 of the Companies Act, 1956 before the Hon'ble Appeal Court and was remanded to this Court, inter alia, with the following directions: 'In the event, the Company Court allows the application for stay of the winding up proceeding and/or setting aside the order of the winding up order, the sate will automatically stand set aside, if however, the Company Court dismissed the application for setting aside the winding up order, the sale shall stand confirmed. There will be no sale and disbursement without the leave of the Company Court.'2. Some of the facts relating to the instant application are as follows:On 20th March, 1986 one Lalit KumarSinha filed a winding up petition beingCompany Petition No. 120 of 1986 againstthe company claiming a sum of Rs. 68,000/-from the Company.3. It appears from the submissions made and it is a matter of record that another winding up petition was filed again...
Murali Export House and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-30-1995
Reported in: (1996)2CALLT141(HC),[1999]238ITR257(Cal)
Tarun Chatterjee, J. 1. This writ application is directed against a revi-sional order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (ix), West Bengal under Section 264 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), affirming the order passed by the Income-tax Officer refusing to cancel the disallowance made in the intimation under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act. 2. The facts leading to moving of this writ application are stated below : Writ petitioner No. 1 is a registered firm (hereinafter referred to as 'the firm'), and writ petitioner No. 2 is one of its partners. The firm filed its return of income for the assessment year 1991-92 showing therein profits on export business of Rs. 3,74,960 and claiming exemption from tax of 100 per cent. of such income under Section 80HHC of the Act. It is not in dispute that the return of income was accompanied by the audited profit and loss account as also the auditor's report in respect of general audit of the accounts of the firm. 3. It is also not ...
Arindam Chatterjee Vs. Coal India Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-30-1995
Reported in: (1997)IIILLJ1070Cal
ORDERSatya Brata Sinha, J. 1. This application is directed against an order dated May 22, 1995 as contained in Annexure 'B' to the writ petition whereby and whereunder the Respondent No. 5 terminated the petitioner's probationary appointment in exercise of its jurisdiction under Clause 6 of Letter of Appointment issued to him being dated December 2 & 6, 1994. 2. The fact of the matter lies in a very narrow compass. 3. The petitioner was a land loser. He was appointed by the respondent company in terms of a letter of appointment dated December 2 & 6, 1994, a copy whereof is contained in Annexure 'A' to the writ petition. Clause 6 of the said letter of appointment reads thus : '6. Your services will be liable to be terminated at any time during your probationary period at the discretion of the management.' 4. The contention of the petitioner, inter alia, is that the aforementioned provision is ultra vires Article 14 of the Constitution of India as also Section 23 of the Indian Contract A...
Apj Lines Vs. Mrs. Sabita Mitra and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-29-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ1617
ORDERR.P. Gupta, J.1. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against a summons to the petitioner issued by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 6th Court Calcutta Under Section 145 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958, therein after referred to as 'the Act'. The objection taken mainly, which has been mooted at the Bar by the Id. Counsel for the petitioner is that this summons is illegal as it is titled as 'summons to an accused person' thereby suggesting that the petitioner has to appear as an accused person and if they so. appear they have to be put to bail as an accused person. The assertion is that proceedings Under Section 145 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 is a proceeding for recovery of unpaid wages of a seaman against the person liable to pay. It is not a proceeding of trial as an accused.2. Section 145 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 is in following terms : 'Recovery of wages'.'145(1) A seaman or apprentice or a person duly authorised on his ...
Swapan Bose Vs. Ram Krishna Co-operative Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-25-1995
Reported in: (1996)ILLJ1180Cal
N.K. Batabyal, J.1. The writ petitioner was appointed as a Chief Executive Officer in Ram Krishna Cooperative Bank Ltd. (hereinafter called the Bank) registered under the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act for a probationary period of three months as per annexure - A to the writ-petition. The said appointment was duly confirmed by the Board of Directors of the bank as per annexure A-1 to the writ petition. Subsequently, the designation of the petitioner was changed from Chief Executive Officer to Chief Executive. AM on a sudden, the petitioner received a letter dated February 21. 1993 issued by the respondent No. 2 marked annexure-H to the Writ Petition. It appeared from the letter that National Savings Certificates No. 6 NS/G-67I544 to 671553 dated August 4, 1986 in the names of Smt. Jharna Chakraborty and Sri Parimal Chakraborty which were pledged in favour of the Bank were given to the petitioner with due authorization to encash the same from the Alipore Post Office, Calcutta, o...
Sanjit Kumar Sardar and Others Vs. State of West Bengal and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-24-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Cal135,(1996)1CALLT25(HC),100CWN489
ORDER1. In each of the 4 writ petitions, which have been heard analogously, the writ petitioner has challenged an order passed by the Regional Transport Authority rejecting the application of the petitioner for grant of temporary permit.2. Each of the writ petitioners applied for grant of temporary Stage Carriage Permit in route No. 12/C/1/2 before the Regional Transport Authority, Calcutta region. As the said application was not being disposed of, each of the petitioners moved this Hon'ble Court under Article 226 of the Constitution whereupon Shri Rang Mishra, J. was pleased to dispose the writ application by directing the Regional Transport Authority, Calcutta, to consider the question of grant of temporary permit for Stage Carriage to the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of 8 weeks from the communication of the order. Such application was thereafter considered by the Regional Transport Authority, Calcutta, considered and the petitioner was communicated with an order...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »