Kolkata Court July 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.
Charan Bala Mondal and ors. Vs. Minati Mondal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-10-1998
Reported in: (1998)3CALLT43(HC)
S.B. Sinha, J. 1. This reference has been made by the Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.P. Sarkar-II. by an order dated 23rd July. 1977 on the question as to whether in terms of the appellate side rules of this court, an appeal from original order should be heard by a division bench or a single bench.2. In order to answer the reference it is not necessary to notice the fact of the matter in details.3. The appeal which was placed before the learned Judge valued at 80,025 arose from an order passed by Assistant District Judge, 1st Court, Barasat in Title Suit No. 2 65/95 whereby and whereundcr the said learned Judge directed the parties to the suit to maintain stains quo in respect of nature, character and possession of the suit property till the disposal of the suit. The said appeal came up for hearing before the learned single Judge and a doubt was expressed as to whether the same should be heard by a single Judge or a division bench. Hence the reference.4. An amendment has been made by this court...
Sashank Investment and Construction Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Income-tax ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-10-1998
Reported in: [1999]239ITR603(Cal)
Ajoy Nath Ray, J.1. The writ petitioners hereinafter called Sashank are developers.2. By different agreements they entered into contracts with the owners of the land in question, the Boses.3. These were agreements for sale and development agreements.4. Pursuant to these Sashank have built upon the land. They now proposed to sell the nine flats and there are already on the scene some six purchasers who have paid the money.5. The writ application has arisen because on an application made by Sashank, the Income-tax Officer has refused to grant clearance under Section 230A.6. The principal point of the Income-tax Officer has been that unless a clearance certificate is obtained by the Boses first, he is not minded to grant a clearance certificate to Sashank the developer.7. The case of Sashank in the writ petition has been that the Boses are still the legal owners of the land but they are under a compulsion to convey it to Sashank or their nominees who will be the flat owners.8. Further it ...
Sashank Investment and Construction (P) Ltd. and anr. Vs. Income Tax O ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-10-1998
Reported in: (1999)156CTR(Cal)259
ORDERAJOY NATH RAY, J.The writ petitioners, hereinafter called Sashank are developers.By different agreements they entered into contracts with the owners of the land in question, the Boses.These were agreements for sale and development agreements.Pursuant to these Sashank have built upon the land. They now proposed to sell the nine flats and there are already on the scene some six purchasers who have paid the money.The writ application has arisen because on an application made by Sashank, the Income Tax Officer has refused to grant clearance under section 230A.The principal point of the Income Tax Officer has been that unless a clearance certificate is obtained by the Boses first, he is not minded to grant a clearance certificate to Sashank, the developer.2. The case of Sashank in the writ petition has been that the Boses are still the legal owners of the land but they are under a compulsion to convey it to Sashank or their nominees who will be the flat owners.Further, it is the case o...
In Re: Sm. Angur Bala Parui
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-08-1998
Reported in: AIR1999Cal102
ORDER1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sukumar Bhattacharyya, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 to 5, Mr. Debabrata Bhattacharjee and the learned counsel for C.E.S.C, Mr. Soumitra Pal.2. The petitioner is the tenant of the premises governed by the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act by which the respondent Nos. 4-6 herein are joint landlords. The petitioner has made an application for supply of electricity to the said tenanted premises and has also complied with the requisite formalities including the deposit of money as directed by the electricity authority in that behalf. The electricity authorities have however not given the connection to the said tenanted premises in the occupation of the petitioner on the ground that an objection has been filed before them by the landlords of the premises (Annexure 'E' to the writ petition).3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that the statutory duty is cast upon the electricity authorities...
M/S. Prabhat Oil Mill and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-06-1998
Reported in: (1998)3CALLT280(HC)
B.M. Mitra, J.1. In this writ proceeding multiple prayers were canvassed, namely, to recall a notice dated 11.3.98 and also substantially for a prayer not to charge any interest or add interest over the amount due on the principal amount. These are the basic prayers in the writ petition. It appears from the perusal of the necessary annexure particularly from Annexure 'B' dated 6.4.90 wherein in terms of the annexure attached to the said notice there appears to be a clause of interest mentioning the rate. Attention of this court has been drawn by Mr. Roy on behalf of the Stale-respondents with regard to clause of interest that it will not affect the right of the Corporation to realise the defaulted interest on the entire loan thereof by legal steps or otherwise. In appears that in absence of any challenge being thrown with regard to the basic agreement, it becomes debatable as to whether the petitioner can challenge one of the pertinent clauses in the said agreement relating lo interest...
Srimanta Kumar Mondal and ors. Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-02-1998
Reported in: (1999)1CALLT63(HC),1998(2)CHN276
S.B. Sinha, J. 1. The petitioners who are five in numbers, three of whom are working in different Schools situate in the District of North 24-Parganas, have filed the writ application praying for the following reliefs :--'(A) Leave be granted to the petitioners under Order 1 Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure to move this present writ application and to prosecute the same, on behalf of or for the benefit of all persons having the same Interest as that of the petitioners and further direction be given at the expense of the petitioners to give notice of institution of the present writ application to all persons having the same Interest as that of the petitioners by public advertisement in any newspapers or papers circulating in the State of West Bengal. (B) A writ of and/or in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents, their men and agents and/or servants and/or subordinates and/or assigns to rescind and/or to withdraw and/or to cancel the G.O No. 367-End(P) dated 27.4.1992 an...
Ram Prawesh Sharma and anr. Vs. the Union of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-02-1998
Reported in: (1998)3CALLT18(HC)
B. Panigrahi, J. 1. In this case, the writ petitioners have prayed, inter alia, for a writ in the nature of mandamus against the respondents not to give effect to the impugned termination letter being Memo No. F. 44/KVC/93-94/ Admn./Pt-1, dated 30.4.93 Issued by the Principal, Kendriya Vidyataya. Chittaranjan, and further commanding the respondents to allow the petitioners to resume their duties in rendering service in their respective posts of Primary Recruit Teachers (P.R.T.) and Trained Graduate Teacher (T.G.T.).2. The petitioners have claimed to have been selected and appointed in their respective posts of P.R.T./T.G.T. from time to time on purely temporary, part-time and ad hoc basis as stop-gap arrangement. Though they have been rendering their service as a full-time permanent employee in the Kendriya Vidyalaya since their initial appointment, the authorities use to make artificial break now and then in their services. Petitioner No. 1 is an M.A.. B.Ed, having requisite qualifica...
Ruby Rubber Industries Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-02-1998
Reported in: 1999(63)ECC17,1998(104)ELT330(Cal)
ORDERSamaresh Banerjea, J.1. The Petitioner No. 1 which is a partnership firm and Petitioner No. 2 who is a partner of the said firm have challenged in the instant Writ Application the validity of the Order dated 5th November, 1997 and February 11, 1998 passed by Customs Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal being the Respondent No. 2, on the application made by the petitioners before the said Tribunal for stay of realisation of the Excise duty and penalty pending the hearing of the appeal preferred before the Tribunal.2. By the order dated November 5, 1997 the Tribunal being of the view that the petitioners do not have a strong prima facie case and are not in a very poor financial position disposed of the application for stay by directing to pre-deposit an amount of Rs. 20 lakhs towards the Excise duty and Rs. 50,000/-towards penalty by each of the appellant before the Tribunal. It may be recorded that a sum of Rs. 40,10,177.00 p. was claimed as Excise duty and Rs. 5 lakh was i...
Sushil Kumar Jhunjhunwala Vs. Shi S.M. Chowdhury and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-01-1998
Reported in: (1998)3CALLT179(HC)
S.B. Sinha, J. 1. This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 4.6.97 passed by Sri D.K. Roy, learned Judge. 2nd Bench. City Civil Court at Calcutta in Title Suit No. 513 of 1997 whereby and whereunder he allowed an application filed by the respondent No. 1 herein under Order 39 rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure as also allowed an application for mandatory injunction filed in his behalf.2. The basic fact of the matter is not much in dispute.3. One Chiranjilai Jhunjhunwala, father of the appellant was a member of Calcutta Stock Exchange Association Limited. He, in that capacity, was a tenant in respect of the premises belonging to respondent No. 2 herein being room No. 9A. He allegedly made a declaration in favour of the appellant on 10.2.93 to the effect that after his death, the membership card and the said tenancy with connected benefit be transferred to the appellant, who was his eldest son. Admittedly, the said Chiranjilai Jhunjhunwala also issued a letter to the ...
Pratick Kumar Sen Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-01-1998
Reported in: 1998(61)ECC488
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J.1. This is an application filed by the writ petitioner challenging an order dated 21st April, 1995 passed by the Respondent No. 3 revoking .the Clearing Agency Licence issued in the name of M/s. Seaking Shipping Agency, Calcutta under Rule 21(b) and (c) read with Rule 23(7) of the Customs House Agents Licencing Regulation, 1984. The said order has been issued for violation of Rules 14, 14(d) and 20(7) of the said Regulations. The said order was passed inter alia for that the writ petitioner and his employee participated in effecting illegal import of integrated circuits, misdeclaring the same as transistors of such lower value at the Air Cargo Complex, Calcutta.2. The facts of the ease are as follows:--On 23rd March, 1994 Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (hereinafter referred to as D.R.I.) seized goods relating to Bill of Entry No. 668. On 29th March, 1994 D.R.I, seized goods relating to Job File No. 21A/13. On April 1st, 1994 D.R.I, conducted searches in the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›