Kolkata Court January 1998 Judgments
M. Dutta Agency Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-29-1998
Reported in: 1998(101)ELT581(Cal)
ORDERTarun Chatterjee, J.1. The writ petitioner No. 1 is a firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932. The writ petitioner No. 2 is a partner of the writ petitioner No. 1. The writ petitioners were Customs House Agent duly licensed under the provisions of Customs House Agents Licensing Regulation, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as 'the regulation'). By such regulation, they were empowered to act as agent for transaction of any business relating to the entry of import or export of goods at any customs house station. The writ petitioners have been carrying on business as a clearing agent since 1969. The writ petitioners obtained licence bearing No. M-22 under the said regulation. During the course of their business as agent relating to import and export of goods, they acted as agent for clearance of the goods imported by R.S.I. Engineering Pvt. Ltd. The said R.S.I. Engineering Pvt. Ltd. imported various consignments of [Polypropylene] (P.P.) and R.N.J. Export Pvt. Ltd. (herein...
Tag this Judgment!Birla Tyres Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-29-1998
Reported in: 1998(103)ELT23(Cal)
Asish Baran Mukherjee, J.1. This is an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code with a view to quash a proceeding being R.C. Case No. 7(A) of 1996 started by the C.B.I, on 12th January, 1996 against the petitioners and others for alleged offences under Section 120B/420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.2. The short case of the petitioners is that petitioner No. 1 is a company engaged in the business of manufacture of automobile tyres, tubes etc., petitioner No. 2 is a Vice President of the said company and petitioner No. 3 is the Senior Manager (Commercial) of the Company. The production unit of the Company is situated in the District of Balasore in Orissa and the Company has its clearing and forwarding agents all over India. The Company has its Head Office at 53, Syed Amir Ali Avenue, Calcutta.3. The Commissioner, Central Excise & Customs, Bhubaneswar issued three identical show cause notices i...
Tag this Judgment!Narinder Singh Atwal Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-1998
Reported in: [1998]231ITR641(Cal)
M.H.S. Ansari, J.1. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a civil contractor carrying on construction work. On November 6, 1996, and January 24, 1997. the business and residential premises of the petitioner were searched under Section 132(1) of the Income-tax Act. A number of documents including account boks, computer floppies relating to the accounts of the assessee for various branches and various accounting periods were seized. Proceedings were initiated by the assessing authority for the block assessment period April 1, 1986 to January 24, 1997, under Section 158BC. The return for the block period was filed by the petitioner-assessee on October 13, 1997. Thereafter, the petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 72 of 1998 questioning the jurisdiction of the assessing authority to make the assessment under Section 158BC, when the time limit for completion of the said block assessment was said to have expired on November 30, 1997, under Section 158BE. This court, by an order da...
Tag this Judgment!Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-27-1998
Reported in: (1998)ILLJ1228Cal
D.P. Kundu, J. 1. This is an application under Section 17-B, of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 supported by an affidavit affirmed on November 12, 1997. 2. The Central Government was of the opinion that industrial dispute existed between the employers in relation to the management of Budge Budge Installation of M/s. B.P.C.L. and their workmen in respect of the matters specified in the Schedule of the Or.No.-30011/29/1987-D.III(B) dated February 24, 1988. The Schedule annexed to the said Order reads as follows:'Whether the action of the management of M/s.BPCL, Budge Budge Installation in dismissing the following 8 workmen from services with effect from January 24, 1985 is justified. If not, what relief the concerned workmen are entitled to?' 1. Prabir Mukherjee, 2. Sudarsan Mishra, 3. Anil Samaddar, 4. Shaikh Ramjan, 5. Panch Kari Adak, 6. Sudhansu Roy, 7. Mahesh Mandal, 8. Ashok Kumar Dey'. 3. It appears from the aforesaid Order dated February 24, 1988 that the Central Governm...
Tag this Judgment!Ahmed Ali Mullick Vs. Abdul Rob Mullick and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-1998
Reported in: (1998)2CALLT306(HC)
ORDERS. Naryan, J. 1. This revision is directed against the order dated 12.1.95 passed in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 122 of 1989 by the Assistant District Judge, Hooghly, whereby the order dated 14.8.89 passed in Title Suit No. 20 of 1988 by the court of Munsiff. Hooghly granting a mandatory injunction against the defendant-O.P. No. 1 was affirmed.2. In a suit for declaration and injunction, the present petitioner, being a plaintiff there, succeeded in obtaining an order of temporary injunction dated 26.6.88 from the learned trial court in Title Suit No. 20 of 1988 restraining the defendant-O.Ps. from changing the nature and characterof the suit property. The petitioner had asserted a right of passage over a piece of land adjacent to the houses of both the parties . The land-in-question was said to be situated on plot No. 1404/2022 (which has of course been disputed) by the defendant-O.Ps. While the order of temporary injunction was still in force, the plaintiff petitioner came up with a...
Tag this Judgment!Senior Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd. and anr. Vs ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-1998
Reported in: (1998)3CALLT119(HC)
T. Chatterjee, J.1. This revisional application is directed against an order being Order No. 31 dated 10th September, 1997 passed by the Assistant District Judge. Burdwan in Money Suit No. 33 of 1995. By the impugned order, the Asst. District Judge. Burdwan rejected the application filed by the petitioners under section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying for an order of slay of all further proceedings in the aforesaid suit till the disposal of a criminal proceeding being G.R. Case No. 221 of 1994 pending in the court of the City Division Judicial Magistrate. Burdwan which has been started under section 420/407/468/489/120B of the indian Penal Code.2. The facts leading to the filing of the application under section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure can be briefly staled as follows :On 23.7.93, an accident took place in the cold storage of Satima Cold Storage being the plaintiff in the aforesaid money suit. On 24th July. 1993, the petitioners appointed a surveyor who made a repo...
Tag this Judgment!Shyamal Kumar Dhar and anr. Vs. State and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ3140
ORDERShyamal Kumar Sen, J.1. In the instant writ petition, the petitioners prayed for an appropriate direction to be issued upon the C.B.I. authorities to investigate and find out their missing daughter Susmita Dhar who was a student of Ist year M.A. of Jadavpur University. It has been submitted that the said girl along with her classmates, tutors and two other persons who are stated to be uncle and aunt being respondent Nos. 11 and 12 left for Chandipore on 13th May, 1995.2. The case of the petitioners is that on 13th May, 1995 Shri Shyamal Dhar, petitioners No. 1 being the father of Susmita Dhar, took her to Howrah Station for the aforesaid journey to Chandipore. While other students who accompanied Susmita duly returned from Chandipore, the said Susmita did not return and actually she was missing from 16th May, 1995 from Santi Nivas Hotel at Chandipore. The other girls who accompanied Susmita lodged a complaint at Chandipore Police Station. A complaint was also lodged in Calcutta wi...
Tag this Judgment!Saswati Choudhary Vs. the University of Calcutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-1998
Reported in: (1998)2CALLT244(HC)
The Court: This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of Mandamus commanding the University Authority to issue Migration Student Registration Certificate in favour of the petitioner without any further delay and allow her to appear in the forthcoming B.A. Part-I Examination conducted by the University as a regular candidate from Dinabandhu Andrews College Centre.2. The writ petitioners has stated, inter alia. In the application that she passed her All India Secondary School Examination in the year 1904 as 'Patrachar Vidyalaya' candidate under the Central Board of Secondary Education. Immediately after passing out in the said examination, she prosecuted her studies in All India Senior School Certificate Examination in the year 1996 from a 'Patrachar Vidyalaya' under the same Central Board of Secondary Education. After she came out successfully in the said examination, she submitted an application for admission in B.A. Examination (History) as 'P...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Darash Dusad and ors. Vs. Gautam Das and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-1998
Reported in: (1998)2CALLT309(HC)
S. Narayan. J. 1. The petitioners, being the defendants in O.C. Suit No.50 of 1992 of the Court of Munsiff, 1st Court, Malda felt aggrieved of the orderdated 29.9.93 passed by ihe said court whereby his application under section 17(2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 was rejected.2. In an application under section 17(2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, the petitioners, in capacity of a tenant in the demised premises, had submitted that since they had incurred expenditure towards repair of the premises to the tune of Rs. 23,404, the entire arrear of rent had been fully paid up and even the rent for the coming months also will stand paid up. There was, however, an alternative prayer also to fix up easy instalments of payment if any amount of rent is found to be due.3. By the impugned order the learned trial court refused the prayer being time barred as also on merits.4. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties it is deemed necessary to point out at the very o...
Tag this Judgment!Bank of India Vs. Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, West Ben ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-1998
Reported in: (1998)3CALLT232(HC)
B.M. Mitra, J. 1. Let the affidavit of service filed in court be kept on record.The instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against Order No. 20 dated 18.11.96 at the instance of Bank of India in T.A. No. 314 of 1994 pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. It appears from the perusal of the impugned order that on the date fixed, an adjournment petition has been filed on the ground of the death of one of the near relation of respondent Nos. 1 to 6 due to cancer for which they were alleged to be away at Bombay in the State of Maharashtra. The court has granted time and has also further given direction for exchange of affidavits and supplementary affidavits. In the body of the order the court has made a reference that the applicant-bank would have filed the supplementary affidavit of evidence at least seven days before the date of hearing which stood adjourned and the bona fides of the petitioner Bank has been subsequently, proved that on the date f...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »