Kolkata Court March 1997 Judgments
Bhagawati Prosad Himatsingka and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-1997
Reported in: (1998)145CTR(Cal)380
BARIN GHOSH, J. :The appellants before us filed a writ petition, in which they challenged the institution of Criminal Case No. C/284/93 by filing a complaint dt. 24th March, 1993, under ss. 276B and 278B of the IT Act, 1961, and all proceedings, notices and orders relating thereto.In the writ petition, the appellants contended that until 31st March, 1994, they carried on business in partnership in the name and style of 'Bhagwati Prasad Mahendra Kumar'. On and from 1st April, 1994, the said partnership firm has been dissolved and since then it is a proprietary concern of appellant No. 1. Until its dissolution, the said firm was an income-tax assessee assessed under the status of a 'registered firm'. The said firm maintained its accounts in accordance with the mercantile system of accountancy. During the accounting year ended on 31st December, 1983, the asst. yr. 1984-85, the said firm credited the accounts of its creditors with the interest payable to them on the loans taken from them. ...
Tag this Judgment!West Bengal Financial Corporation Vs. Official Liquidator
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Cal262
ORDER1. This application has been filed by the West Bengal Financial Corporation, hereinafter refered to as 'the Corporation', under Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956, inter alia, for the following reliefs:--'a) Leave be given to West Bengal Financial Corporation, the applicant above-named under Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956 to proceed with the proceedings initiated under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act 1951 and the Official Liquidator and/or the Corporation be given leave to execute the conveyance in favour of Studio Print Art upon receipt of the balance consideration of Rs. 21,07,500/- from the highest offerer. b) Leave be given to the applicant to proceed with the suit filed under Section 31 of the State Financial Corporations Act, being Original Suit No. 19 of 1994, pending before the Learned District Judge's Court of Barasat against the guarantors, who are ex-Director of the Company. c) The Official Liquidator be directed to invite claim of the wor...
Tag this Judgment!Sadre Alam Mullick Vs. State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1997
Reported in: 1997CriLJ2441
D.P. Sarkar-II, J.1. This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment and the Order of conviction and setnence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Bankura in Sessions Trial No. 1 of May, 1988 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code arising out of Indus P.S. Case No. 19 of 1981.2. The facts, in short, leading to this case are as follows: -- The deceased Abu Bakkar was the husband of the informant viz. Sahara Begum. The deceased had amorous relationship with the 1st wife of the convict-appellant - Sadre Alam Mullick. On 30-8-1981 at about 9.00 p.m. after taking the night meal the deceased -- Abu Bakkar came out of his house when the convict-appellant with the help of the other accused persons forcibly abducted him in presence of the informant and took the deceased to the house of the convict-appellant. The informant called her brothers-in-law and the father-in-law. The brothers-in-law went to the house of the convict-appellant and found that the deceased was being...
Tag this Judgment!Jaibal Bearing and Mills Stores Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-13-1997
Reported in: 1998(97)ELT411(Cal)
ORDERVinod Kumar Gupta, J.1. The dispute initially as raised by the petitioner was with regard to the seizure and confiscation of the goods by the Customs Authorities. Later on however when the confiscation order passed by the Additional Collector of Customs was set aside by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), the dispute got converted into one relating to the liabilities of the parties with regard to the payment of the port and demurrage charges. The facts lying in a very narrow campas. The petitioner imported three consignments of goods in the month of April, 1992, whereas the first consignment was cleared and/or released without any problem. The dispute arose with regard to two consignments. It was on June 8, 1992 that both the consignments were seized by the Customs Authorities. Consequent upon the seizure of this two consignments a show cause notice was issued upon the petitioner calling upon the petitioner to show cause and explain as to why the goods covered by both the consignm...
Tag this Judgment!Ashit Baran Chatterjee Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1997
Reported in: (1997)2CALLT82(HC)
Altamas Kabir, J.1. This writ application is directed against a Memo No. 1586.PAR(WBCS) dated 16th July, 1992, issued by the Assistant Secretary, Home (P&AR;) Department, Government of West Bengal, to the SubDivisional Officer, Barrackpore, and the order passed thereon by the said Sub-Divisional Officer, Barackpore on 10th August, 1992, in his capacity as the Competent Authority under the West Bengal Government Premises (Regulation of Occupancy) Act, 1984, issued to the Inspector-in-Charge, Khardah Police Station.2. The petitioner claims to have been inducted as a monthly tenant at C-54 Amarabati, Sodepore, under Khardah Police Station, in the District of North 24 Parganas, by Sreemati Krishna Roy, the respondent No. 7 in this application, on 1st July, 1988, at a monthly rental of Rs. 100/- payable according to the English calender, in respect of the accommodation described in paragraph 2 of the writ petition.3. It is also the petitioner's case that on or about 17th March, 1989, the re...
Tag this Judgment!Competent Authority Vs. Western India Commercial Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-1997
Reported in: (1997)2CALLT294(HC)
Basudeva Panigrahi, J.1. This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India filed against the order dated 9.5.89 passed by the appellate authority under Section 33 of the Urban Land (Celling and Regulation) Act, 1976 modifying the order passed by the competent authority under Section 6(1) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 in URL(S) 731/76.2. The facts leading to the present dispute may be summarised as hereunder:The opposite party M/s. Western India Commercial Co. Ltd., 65, Sir Hariram Goenka St. Calcutta-70 filed a statement on 14.6.76 under Section 6(1) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 stating, inter alta, that the company possessed land measuring 11 Bighas 7 Cottahs 14 Chittaka 35 sq. ft. in C.S. Plot No. 225 which has been enclosed with 'annexure X'. After receiving the statement, a spot enquiry was conducted on 30th August, 1986 and from the aforementioned enquiry it turnedout that the opposite party-Company possessed 15245...
Tag this Judgment!Ashim Sarker Vs. M/S. Chitra Zahir and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-10-1997
Reported in: (1998)1CALLT127(HC)
B. M. Mitra, J.1. The instant revlslonal application is directed against order No. 11 and order No. 12 respectively passed on 4.7.96 and 5.7.96 by the Third Bench of City Civil Court, Calcutta in Title Suit No.974 of 1996.2. The matter is taken up for hearing on contest and detailed submissions have been made by the respective counsels appearing for both the sides. The first order is the order No. 11 dated 4.7.96 by which a petition under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure stood allowed. It appears from the look of the impugned order that the same is a cryptic one which does not spell out any reasoning. In the backdrop of the same, this court has been invited to look into the matter in question namely, the petition for amendment and also the relevant paragraphs of the connected plaint in order to impress upon this court as to whether the order should be sustained. Though no grounds have been mentioned in the order, but this court has been addressed at length by both the si...
Tag this Judgment!Sk. Saiful Nandlal and ors. Vs. Sk. Akkas Ali
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-10-1997
Reported in: AIR1998Cal137
ORDERB.M. Mitra, J.1. The instant revisional application under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is taken up for contested hearing at the motion stage in presence of the Caveator being directed against order dated 21-12-1996 passed by the 3rd Court of Munsif at Srerampore in Title Execution Case No. 4 of 1996 on an application under Order 21, Rule 106 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. At the initial stage of the hearing of the instant application a preliminary objection was raised by the Opposite Party about the maintainability of the revisional application as, according to the contention of the Opposite Party, the same is open to appeal in terms of Order 43, Rule 1(ja)of the Code of Civil Procedure. It has been contended that in terms of the provisions contained in Rule 106 of Order 21, if an order is made under Sub-rule (2) of Rule 105 or the Opposite Party against whom an order is passed ex parte under Sub-rule (3) of that Rule, one may apply to the Cour...
Tag this Judgment!Ranjit Kumar Dutta Vs. Tapan Kumar Shaw and Another
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-06-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Cal278
1. This appeal has been assigned to me by the Hon'ble, The Chief Justice on difference of opinions of the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Babu Lall Jain and the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sidheshwar Narayan.2. The following two questions, were raised by the tenant/appellant in this appeal --(i) Whether the lease, as per registered deed dated 8th of October, 1956 for an initial period of 15 years commencing from 1st of October, 1956 to 30th of September, 1971 fell short of 15 years so as to be governed by the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 and to entitle the tenant-appellant to the benefits secured under the said Act?(ii) Whether the said lease would be deemed to have expired by efflux of time on the expiry of the initial period of 15 yearsin the year 1971 as the lease was not renewed by virtue of a registered deed and as such the defendant-appellants' continuing in possession of the demised premises thereafter and paying the rent wouldbe deemed to be holding over the same under S. 116 of the Tran...
Tag this Judgment!Haridas Basak
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-05-1997
Reported in: AIR1997Cal371
ORDER1. One of the defendants in Ejectment Suit 967/79 has called in question about the propriety of the order passed by the learned Judge, IXth Bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta being Misc. Case No.2733/95 rejecting the application of the petitioner under O.9, R.9 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The opposite party filed the original ejectment suit on the ground of reasonable requirement, default in payment of rent and for subletting. The suit was decree ex parte on 3-9-91. The present petitioner filed an application for setting aside the ex parte decree which was registered as Misc. Case No. 979 of 1991 and it was dismissed for default on 9-5-92. Therefore, the petitioner filed another application for restoration of the Misc. Case which was registered as Misc. Case No.433 of 1992. The application for restoration of the Misc. Case was allowed and ultimately the Misc. Case No. 979 of 1991 was restored to file. The said Misc. Case 979 of 1991 was dismissed on contest. Therefore, the peti...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »