Kolkata Court February 1998 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.
Seth and Associates Vs. Steel Authority of India
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-1998
Reported in: (1998)2CALLT311(HC)
A. Lala, J.1. This is on application made by the petitioners challenging the award made and published by the Arbitrator on 10th February, 1997. The respondent instead of contesting such application in merit raised point of maintainability of the application, being consequential to the filing of the award filed in the court at the instance of the petitioner on 11th November, 1997.2. According to the respondent there is no time limit for the purpose of filing of the award by the Arbitrator in the court so to say that eitherthe limitation for filing the award by the Arbitrator is not at all covered by the Limitation Act or if at all, covered by the residuary article being Article 137 of the Act. But a lltlgent cannot withhold the award on behalf of the Arbitrator and cause delay in filing it before the court to frustrate the entire proceedings. There should be a check and balance otherwise such cause will render to an absurdity.3. The point is very pertinent considering the situation.4. T...
Calcutta Municipal Corporation and ors Vs. M/S. Bala Bestos India Ltd,
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-10-1998
Reported in: (1998)2CALLT249(HC),1998(1)CHN492
ORDERThe Court 1. These appeals arise out of a common Judgment and order passed by a learned single Judge of this court in Writ Petition No. 2281 of 1996, whereby and whereunder the petitioners' writ petition questioning the orders of revision in valuation of the premises dated 27.8.1996 as contained in annexure 'F' to the writ application were allowed.2. The basic fact of the matter is not in dispute. The petitioners are residents of separate flats situated in a multi-storeyed building at premises No. 14, Ballygunge Park. Calcutta-19.3. From annexure 'A' to the Writ Application it appears that one Mr. Aditya Kanoria, who is said to be the original owner of the land and the building, had furnished the details as regards the Floor No., Unit No., Name and Address of the Occupier, the Unit Area Sq. Ft. Including Common Areas, Value of Agreements (Rs.), Dates of Agreements, Dates of Registration of Land. Date of Possession. Accommodation Type, Car Parks, Drivers' Quarters/Stores, etc. of t...
Golden Steel Corporation Ltd. Vs. Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-10-1998
Reported in: (1998)2CALLT334(HC)
S. Narayan, J.1. In a suit for declaration and injunction, being T.S. No,244, of 1994 of the court of 4th Munsiff at Howrah, the petitioner-company, being the plaintiff, challenged the right of the O.P.--company/ defendant No.1 to invoke and/or enforce payment of as many as 4 Bank Guarantees issued by the O.P. Bank Guarantee of the Punjab National Bank (O.P./Defendant No.2). There was an order of status quo granted in favour of the petitioner but, ultimately, the prayer for temporary injunction was refused by the order dated 25.7.96 of the learned trial court as against which the petitioner preferred an appeal being Miscellaneous appeal No. 145 of 1996. By the impugned order dated 8.1.98, the miscellaneous appeal was dismissed and the order of refusal passed by the trial court was affirmed. This led to the filing of the instant revision it petition.2. Be it recorded at the very outset that by way of repeated decisions, the apex court has restricted grant of stay or restraint order in t...
Hindustan Copper Ltd. and ors. Vs. Copper Mazdoor Union and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-10-1998
Reported in: [1998(79)FLR295],(1998)IILLJ547Cal
ORDERBhagabati Prosad Banerjee, J.1. This is an appeal filed by Hindustan Copper Limited, against the judgment dated December 1, 1997 passed in W.P.No.2335 of 1997, directing that the order of closure of Musaboni Copper Mines situated in the State of Bihar could not be given effect to till the review application filed by some other unions before the Central Government was pending.2. The learned Judge was of the view thatthere has been no proper application of mindwhen the original order was passed and that wasthe reason His Lordship was of the view thatthe Central Government should hear out the review application filed by some other unions first. 3. Copper Mazdoor Union and others filed a Writ application for cancelling and withdrawing the permission granted by the Central Government for closing down the industrial i establishment at Musaboni (including Badia mines) situated in the State of Bihar with effect from December 1,1997).4. The Hindusthan Copper Corporation; Limited owns vario...
Debasish Moulik Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-06-1998
Reported in: [1998]231ITR737(Cal)
M.H.S. Ansari, J.1. 'The petitioner is the assessee in the instant case for the relevant assessment year 1995-96. A demand of Rs. 10,41,633 was raised upon assessment made under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act. Being aggrieved the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). Meanwhile, the petitioner made an application under Section 220(6) of the Income-tax Act before the assessing authority requesting that the demand be stayed on account of pendency of the appeal against the order of assessment and that the petitioner should not be treated as an assessee in default.2. By the order dated January 28, 1998, the assessing authority held that in view of the appeal having been preferred by the assessee, the assessee was requested to pay 50 per cent, of the demand and upon such payment the application for stay would be considered. Seven days' time for payment was granted failing which it was directed that the stay petition shall stand rejected and recovery measures...
Williamson Magor and Co. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Naru Gopal Laik and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-06-1998
Reported in: (1998)IILLJ950Cal
D.P. Kundu, J.1. AH these writ petitions being W.P. 19311 (W) of 1997 (M/s. Williamson Magor) have been heard analogously because the questions involved in all these writ petitions are same. In all these writ petitions M/s. Williamson Magor & Co. Ltd. & Anr. (previously known as M/s. Macneill & Magor Ltd.) is the writ petitioner and hereinafter referred to as the employer. In these writ petitions the employer has challenged the Appellate Orders passed by the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Asansol-II being appellate authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1992 confirming the orders of the Controlling Authority. As the matters have been heard analogously, common arguments have been made covering all these cases. Under these circumstances a common judgment is being passed covering all the aforesaid writ petitions. For the purpose of convenience the writ petition in W.P.19312 (W) of 1997 is being considered.2. On January 9, 1998 the Learned Advocate appearing for the responde...
Debasish Moulik N. Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-06-1998
Reported in: (1998)150CTR(Cal)387
The petitioner is the assessee in the instant case for the relevant assessment year 1995-96. A demand of Rs. 10,41,633 was raised upon assessment made under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. Being aggrieved the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). Meanwhile, the petitioner made an application under section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act before the assessing authority requesting that the demand be stayed on account of pendency of the appeal against the order of assessment and that the petitioner should not be treated as an assessee in default.2. By the order dated 28-1-1998, the assessing authority held that in view of the appeal having been preferred by the assessee, the assessee was requested to pay 50 per cent of the demand and upon such payment the application for stay would be considered. Seven days time for payment was granted failing which it was directed that the stay petition shall stand rejected and recovery measures shall be initiated.3. Being a...
Ranjit Kumar De Majumder Vs. the Secretary, Higher Education, Governme ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-05-1998
Reported in: (1998)1CALLT432(HC)
1. The Court : The petitioner claims to be in the employment of the Regional Engineering College, Durgapur, as a 'Draftsman' in the department of Applied Mechanics and drawing salary and other benefits as perthe scales of the State Government in accordance with the provisions of the Scheme of Establishment for Regional Engineering Colleges.2. According to the petitioner, the Regional Engineering College, Durgapur, hereinafter referred to as the 'College', has a Standing Committee )Management), which in its meeting of 20th November. 1977. recommended acceptance in principle of the New Intermediate Selection Grade for employees of the College in accordance with the norms laid down by the State Government.3. It is the petitioner's case that there are two scales of pay for draftsman in the College, namely,(i) Rs. 230 - 424/- (Basic grade). (ii) Rs. 300 - 600/- (For ITI Certificate holders). 4. It appears that after a decision was taken to award the New Intermediate Selection Grade to the e...
The Central Agricultural Research Institute and anr. Vs. the Presiding ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-03-1998
Reported in: (1998)3CALLT209(HC)
G. R. Bhattacharjee, J. 1. In this writ petition under Article 226 the wril petitioners have challenged the award dated the 29th August, 1996 passed by the Labour Court, Andaman and Nicobar islands at Port Blair as published in the Andaman and Nicobar Gazette dated the 3Ist December, 1996, Annexure-G to the writ petition. The said award was passed by the Labour Court on a reference made to the said court by the Lieutenant Governor, Andaman and Nicobar administration on 6th December, 1994 under section 10(1) read with section 12, 15) of the industrial Disputes Act. 1947. The notification about the said reference is Annexure-D to the writ petition. The matter that was the subject of reference was formulated in the said notification by the Lieutenant Governor (Administrator). Andaman and Nicobar islands in the following form:Whether the action of the management of Central Agriculture Research institute in retrenching 42 Majdoors as per annexure with effect from1.8.86 is legal and justifie...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›