Kolkata Court September 1995 Judgments
Pushpa Devi Bhojnagarwala Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-1995
Reported in: (1996)56ITD302(Kol.)
1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of by.CIT(A), Range-XVI, Calcutta dated 15-1-1991.2. In this appeal the assessee has challenged the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer in levying penalty under Section 273(2)(c) of the Act. For the assessment year 1983-84, the assessee has filed an estimate on 13-9-1982 estimating the total income at Rs. 30, 000. A revised estimate was filed on 11-3-1983 estimating the income at Rs. 40, 000. However, the income returned was Rs. 73, 940 which was accepted by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) subject to rectification under Section 155 adopting correct share income from the firms. Thus, the returned income and the assessed income was higher than the income shown in the estimate. In fact, the assessee has received a notice for payment of advance-tax amounting to Rs. 31, 870 on total income of Rs. 81, 400. However, in response to the same, the assessee has filed a lower estimate by estimating the income at Rs. 30, 000...
Tag this Judgment!Arunava Ghosh and Others Vs. Bar Council of West Bengal and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Cal331
ORDER1. Does the Bar Council of West Bengal which is a Statutory Body, have the jurisdiction to call upon the Advocates on its roll to cease their work and to desist from attending Court? Would such a call if given bythe Bar Council be binding on an Advocate? Can the Bar Council take steps for penalising an Advocate who chooses to ignore such call given by the Bar Council?2. Such grave and important questions have come up for consideration by this Court at the instance of four practicing Learned Advocates of this Court, who in the writ petition have challenged the resolutions of the Bar Council of West Bengal dated 3rd May, 6th May, 11th May and 13th May, 1994 and the jurisdiction of the Bar Council to give such a call.3. By the resolution dated 3rd May, 1994 it was resolved by the Bar Council of West Bengal, inter alia, as follows:--'This Council having considered the disturbing position of Alipore Criminal Court and the Howrah Court and having also noted the letter of the West Bengal...
Tag this Judgment!Central Bank of India Vs. Panalur Paper Mills and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-1995
Reported in: (1997)1CALLT51(HC)
Umesh Chandra Banerjee, J. 1. The rules of the High Court at Calcutta, Original Side, have special significance for the purpose of due administration of justice. It has stood the test of time and the powers of the High Court to frame rules have been preserved under the Letters Patent which is saved by the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure. From time of time the High Court by resolutions adopted, the Rules on the Original Side of this Court and same has a binding effect in regard to suits instituted in the Original Side of this Court. 2. Chapter 13(A) of the Rules of this Court provides for summary procedure in suits to recover debts of liquidated demands or immovable property. Rule 1 of Chapter 13(A) expressly records that the provisions of the Chapter shall not be applicable save to suits as mentioned in Sub-rule (A) and (B). Sub-rule (B) of Rule 1 provides the application of the Chapter in regard to suits for the recovery of immovable property with or without claim for rent o...
Tag this Judgment!Fylfot (i) Ltd. and Another Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Cal291
ORDER1. In this writ application the petitioners have challenged the Notice Inviting Tender being T.E. No. S/ W-95-96/02 dated 2-6-1995 initially scheduled to be opened on 13th July 1995, but rescheduled for opening on 1st August, 1995 issued by theRespondent No. 4, the Assistant General (P) under COM, Telocm Stores, Calcutta.2. The petitioner No. 1 is a company and petitioner No. 2 is its Director. They are engaged in manufacture of PVC Insulated Galvanised M. S. Wires. It is their case that PVC Insulated Galvanised M.S. Wires are manufactured by them exclusively/or supply to the Department of Tele-communication which is the only buyer of such materials in the country. On 10-1-1994, the petitioner No, 1 got a Type Approval Certificate from the Quality Assurance Authority which is a wing of the Department of Tele-communication. On 9-5-1995, petitioner No. 1 secured an order for supply of 1000 k.m. of PVC Insulated Galvanised M.S. Wires from the Department of Tele-communication. The ord...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Gitika Bagchi Vs. Subhabrota Bagchi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Cal246,100CWN646
ORDERR. Bhattacharyva, J.1. This First Appeal arises for the suit being decreed under Section 25 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, by the Id. Additional Dist. Judge in Matrimonial Suit No. 32 of 1990 on 18th of January, 1992, followed by a decree dated 10th of February, 1992.2. The case represents the broken heart of the two spouses who laboured hard for 8 years to be united. It has now become a harrowing tale which requires elucidation as the husband wants to avoid the marital tie via Court by a decree.3. The undisputed facts of the case are that the petitioner and the respondent, both co-employees of the 'Aajkal Patrika' though of different religion developed intimacy with each other which culminated in a marriage between the two on 17th of June, 1988, in substantial compliance with the provisions of the Special Marriage Act, 1954.4. Consummation of marriage was allegedly stalled by her from the inception of marriage for two reasons : (i) transfer of properties of her mother-in-law ...
Tag this Judgment!PoolIn Haldar Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ513
Satyabrata Sinha, J.1. This appeal is directed against a judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Port Blair, in Sessions Case No. 11 of 1991 (Sessions Trial No. 1 of 1993) whereby and whereunder the said learned court convicted the accused/appellant for commission of an alleged offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and causing homicidal death to Jatin Mondal, and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.2. The incident took place at Village-Ganesh Nagar within P. S. Dinglipur at about 11 -30 A. M. to 12 noon on 12-9-88. The accused, the deceased and the material witnesses, namely, P.W. 2 Nikhil Biswas, P.W. 3 Kalipada Roy, P.W. 7 Kusum Deori, P. W. 9 Renubala Majhi, P.W. 11 Sudhir Deori, P.W. 12 Narayan Byapari, P.W. 13 Manindra Samaddar and P.W. 15 Basudeb Haider are all residents of the same village. The first information report was lodged by Sudhir Deori, P.W. 11 at about 7-30 P. M. ...
Tag this Judgment!Ashok Kumar Kabra Vs. Kamala Devi Shaw and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ876
ORDERNure Alam Chowdhary, J.1. This application under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of the complainant Ashok Kumar Kabra, challenging the order dated 16-3-95, passed by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Howarh in Criminal Misc. Case No. 97 of 1995 allowing the application for anticipatory bail of the opposite party No. 1 Smt. Kamala Devi Shaw and the opposite party No. 2 Smt. Kanika Devi Shaw with conditions mentioned in the order, in connection with Shibpur P. S. Case No. 273 of 1994, under Sections 409/420/120B of the I. P. C. was finally heard by his Lordships the Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. K. Bhattacharyya, by his judgment and order dated 28-6-95 had been pleased to set aside the impugned order passed by the learned Sessions Judge with certain directions contained in the order. The opposite parties Kamala Devi Shaw and Kanika Devi Shaw thereafter filed a petition for Special Leave Petition being S. L. P. (Crl) No. 2657 of 1995, in th...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Hamid and ors. Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-22-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ498
ORDERNripendra Kumar Bhattacharyya, J.1. By the instant revision under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the accused petitioners have challenged the proceedings, being Sessions Case No. 41 of 1991, arising out of G. R. Case No. 946 of 1983, pending in the Court of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Malda; and the Ralua P. S. Case No. 8 dated 5-7-83 on which the G. R. Case was started, on the ground that there is inordinate delay in the process of conclusion of the trial. In other words, the provision of Article 21 of the Constitution of India has been offended.2. The scenario on which this revisional application has been moved is that one Abdul Basir of village Malopara, P. S. Ratua, District Malda, on 5-7-83, lodged an F. I. R. with the Ratua Police Station being Ratua P. S. Case No. 8 dated 5-7-83, alleging offence against the accused persons and others under Sections 147, 148, 149, 448, 427, 436, 380, 323, 324, 325, 326 and 302 of the Indian Penal Cod...
Tag this Judgment!Niranjan Dey Vs. the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-22-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ1424
ORDERR.P. Gupta, J.1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner Niranjan De for quashing of the prosecution filed against him by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner for violation of various provisions of Employees Provident Fund and miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, (hereinafter called, the Act) and Scheme framed thereunder, known as Employees Provident Fund Scheme, 1952, (hereinafter called the Scheme, and thus having committed offences punishable under Section 14(1A), 14(2), 14A(1), and 14AA of the Act. The petitioner is Managing Director of a company, called Messrs. Favourite Small Investment Ltd., to which the provisions of the Act and the Scheme were applicable. The prosecution was started by a complaint filed by Provident Fund Inspector, West Bengal with the previous sanction of the Regional Provident Commissioner as required under Section 14AAC of the Act for failure of the company to pay the employees' share as well as employers' contributi...
Tag this Judgment!Rashbehari United Club and Others Vs. Hazarimal Sharma
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-21-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Cal84,(1996)1CALLT194(HC)
ORDERBasudeva Panigrahi, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the reversing judgment and decree passed by learned Additional District Judge, Alipore in T.A. No.338/88 whereby and whereunder he decreed the respondent/plaintiff suit in T.S. No. 194/82.2. The facts leading to this appeal are summarily stated thus:--The respondent/plaintiff has stated in the pleading that the schedule 'A' marked properties originally belonged to one Satyanarayan Sarogi and his wife Laxhmi Devi comprising an extent of 7 cottahs 17 sq. ft. with a brick building and C.I. roof structure standing thereon in municipal premises No. 47B of Sadananda Road within Bhownipore P.S. The plaintiff had occupied the northern portion of the suit premises at a monthly rental under the owner where he was running a Ration Shop bearing No. ER 3009 and the southern portion of it was under the occupation of another tenant Sovelal and Jangiram who carried on their business of a Restaurant by selling tea etc. In course of time tho...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »