Kolkata Court June 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.
Shree Pradeep Kundalia Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-15-1998
Reported in: (1998)2CALLT415(HC)
ORDER1. The petitioner's case is that he was holding an Indian passport and while he was on a visit to Hong Kong, this passport was lost.On his return to India, the petitioner applied for the issuance of a duplicate passport but the respondent No.2 by his communication dated 27th April 1998 Intimated to the petitioner his inability to Issue the said passport to him on the ground that the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 did not clear the name of the petitioner for the grant of such a passport. It is this order of respondent No.2 which the petitioner has assailed in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. Grant of passport undoubtedly is a valuable right of every citizen of India. Refusal to grant a passport undoubtedly is an act which has to be preceded by objective considerations and principles of fair play and natural justice. If a citizen of India is being denied the right of the grant of a passport, the cardinal principles of audi alterem partem immediately co...
Nepc Micon Limited and ors. Vs. Magma Leasing Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-15-1998
Reported in: (1998)2CALLT505(HC)
S. Narayan, J. 1. This revisional petition being one under section 402 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against an order dated December 10. 1997 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 9th Court, Calcutta in complaint case No. C-494 of 1997 under section 138 read with section 141 of the Negotiable instruments Act, 1881, whereby the prayer of the petitioners-accused persons by discharging them under section 258 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was rejected on contest. The complainant-O.P. being a limited company under the Companies Act, 1956 had its registered office at 24, Part Street, Calcutta-700 016 (i.e. within the jurisdiction of Calcutta, West Bengal) and had also a Branch Office atHaddous Road, Nungambakkam. Chennai-600034. The complalnant-O.P. was a financial institution, inter alia, providing fund for Hire purchase of machineries and other assets for business concerns. The complaint in the case was filed by the Assistant Manager (Legal and Administration) ...
Sri Sri Radheshyam Jew and anr. Vs. Valuation Officer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-15-1998
Reported in: [1999]238ITR343(Cal)
Tarun Chatterjee, J. 1. Sri Sri Radheshyam Jew, a Hindu deity located at premises No. 31, Shibnarayan Das Lane, Calcutta (hereinafter referred to as 'the deity'), is the writ petitioner No. 1 and Gopal Lal Chandra, the sole shebayat of the deity is the writ petitioner No. 2 before me. They have jointly challenged the valuation report of the Valuation Officer made under Section 16A of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Learned counsel for the Revenue took a preliminary objection as to the entertain ability of this writ application at this stage, as no assessment order has yet been made by the Wealth-tax Officer in terms of Sub-section (6) of Section 16A of the Act. If this question is answered in the affirmative, then I need not go into the other questions raised by learned counsel for the; writ petitioner on the question whether the valuation report submitted by the Valuation Officer could be accepted or not. In my considered opinion, the preliminary objec...
The Board of Trustees for the Port of Calcutta Vs. Mahalakshmi Constru ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-11-1998
Reported in: (1998)2CALLT525(HC)
The Court 1. By this motion under sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, the petitioner seeks to assail the award dated 6th June, 1997 made and published by Mr. Sankar Bhattacharyya, a retired Judge of this court.2. It would be convenient at this stage to set out briefly the facts leading to the present application by the petitioner.3. By a contract in writing dated 7th September, 1983 the petitioner employed the respondent for construction of 9 blocks of 4-storied (16 units) staff quarters for CISF personnel at Brooklyn in Calcutta.4. The said contract contains the following arbitration clause :--'68(a) in all disputes, matters, claims, demands or questions arising out of or connected with the interpretation of the contract including the meaning of Specifications, Drawings, Designs and instructions or as to the quality of workmanship or as to the materials used in the work or the execution of the work whether during the progress of the works or after the completion and wheth...
Amzad Ali Vs. Marfat Ali Biswas and Two ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-11-1998
Reported in: (1998)2CALLT462(HC),1998(1)CHN236,1997CriLJ4148
D.B. Dutta. J.1. By the Instant application styled as one under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the accused of C.R. Case No. 120 of 1991 of the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Lalbag, moved this court in its criminal revision Jurisdiction praying for setting aside the order dated 19th April, 1991 passed in Misc. Appeal No. 80 of 1989 of the Fourth Court of Additional District Judge, Murshtdabad, and also for quashing the criminal proceeding in C.R. Case No.120 of 1991 of the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Lalbag. 2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to the present application, as far as can be gathered from the materials placed before this court, may in short, be stated as follows. On 27.2.81. the accused petitioner instituted a suit being Title Suit No.6 of 1981 in the Court of the Munslf, Lalbag for declaration of title and Injunction in respect of certain property against the Respondent No.l and some others, basing his right, title and Inte...
Exide Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-11-1998
Reported in: 1999(105)ELT18(Cal)
ORDERSamaresh Banerjea, J.1. In the instant writ petition, the petitioner-company has challenged an order dated November 6,1997 and March 4,1998 passed by the Customs Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, Eastern Bench, Calcutta.2. It is the case of the petitioner that it carries on business of manufacturing various types of electric accumulators including stationary cells/batteries. It is contended that it has been judicially pronounced that in the commercial sense as well as technically a single cell is a battery and it is not necessary that there must be more than one cell to make up a battery. The company manufactures, inter alia, cell/battery of two volt capacity which is designed for service at a permanent location and supplies electrical energy without any accessory being required for the said purpose. It is contended that each two volt cell by itself is a stationary battery commercially as well as technically and independently functions as one. It is further submitted t...
J. K. Corporation Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-09-1998
Reported in: (1999)68ITD240(Kol.)
1. As both these appeals are interrelated and involve common points, so we are disposing them of by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. ITA No. 1650(Cal) of 1996 is an appeal by the assessee for the asst.yr. 1992-93 and is directed against the order of CIT(A), Central-I, Calcutta, dt. 18th March, 1996. ITA No. 1755 (Cal) of 1996 is an appeal by the Department for the same assessment year and against the same impugned order of the learned CIT(A).3. The facts, relevant for the disposal of these appeals, are that the assessee-company was formerly known as Straw Products Ltd. (in short, SPL). The assessee changed its former name to the present name being M/s. J. K. Corporation Ltd. w.e.f. 17th June, 1994. The assessee filed its return of income for asst. yr. 1992-93 on 31st December, 1992, declaring total income of Rs. 23.58 crores with the claim of carried forward unabsorbed investment allowance of Rs. 2,72 crores pertaining to earlier years. Notice under s. 143(2) dt. 26th ...
Achintya Kumar Saha Vs. West Bengal Kabaddi Association
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-09-1998
Reported in: (1998)3CALLT85(HC)
S.B.Sinha, J.1. These two appeals which are directed against a common judgment and order dated 5.3.98 passed by Sri K.J. Majumdar, learned Judge 12th Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta in Title Suit No. 23/1998 whereby and whereunder the said learned court granted an interim injunction in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant and also dismissed the application filed by the defendant/appellant under Order 39 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, were heard together and are being disposed of by this common Judgment.2. The plaintiff/respondent No. 1 is represented by one Ranjit Dhar, said to be Chairman of an Ad-hoc Committee. A suit was filed against the defendant praying, inter alia, for the following reliefs;'(a) Declaration that the defendant has no right or authority to function or act or to hold himself out or to represent himself as Hony. General Secretary of the plaintiff association or to issue any notice/circular or to give any effect to the notice dated 30th Decem...
Arun Sanyal and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-09-1998
Reported in: AIR1998Cal331
ORDER1. The Chief Municipal Engineer (M. & C) (Officiating) has submitted a Report stating that garbage was deposited by the public and not by the Calcutta Municipal Corporation people and that throwing of garbage has totally been stopped by the residents of the locality and one Dust Bin has been placed at the spot and now the area is clean.2. We cannot accept the Report as it is becausesome of the photographs annexed to the petitionindicate that Calcutta Municipal Corporationpeople are dumping the garbages there in order torelieve them from carrying to a longer distance.Secondly the Dust Bin that has been placed arebroken and inadequate. It is not understood howit can be said that throwing of garbages have beenstopped by the local people. 3. Accordingly considering the facts and circumstances of the case we direct the Calcutta Municipal Corporation to clear all garbage that is there and shall take effective steps to see that no , garbage is thrown by anybody and fix liability upon suc...
Madhab Chandra Bakuli Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-09-1998
Reported in: II(1999)DMC160
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. This appeal is directed against judgment and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Fifth Bench of the City Sessions Court at Calcutta in Sessions Case No. 64 of 1988 and Sessions Trial No. 2 of 1989. The appellant/accused stood for trial on the charges under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. The brief fact of the case is as follows :'One Tapati @ Tapu Bakuli being the wife of the appellant/accused died of burn injury which she had sustained at night at about 9.30/9.45 p.m. of 25th February, 1985. After having sustained severe burn injury she was removed from the house of the appellant/accused and admitted to Medical College Hospital. On 25th February, 1985 the said deceased victim made a statement before the Sub-Inspector of Police to the effect that appellant/accused being the husband of the victim on 12 Falgun, 1391, Sunday corresponding to 24th February, 1985 at about 9.30/9.45 p.m. poured keros...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »