Kolkata Court December 2000 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.
Smt. Gita Bhowmick Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-14-2000
Reported in: (2001)1CALLT353(HC)
R. K. Mazumder, J.1. The instant criminal revisional application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is at the instance of the accused-petitioner Smt. Geeta Bhowmick, a Headmistress of Bethuadahari Girls' High School, Nadia and this is for quashing the instant criminal proceeding arising out of G.R. Case No. 1787 of 1972 now pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Krishnanagar, Nadia.2, The case of the accused-petitioner was in brief that on 17.8.72, Shri Shibram Singha Roy, since deceased, filed a petition of complaint against the petitioner and two others making several allegations against them before the learned SDJM, Krishnanagar, Nadia. Thereafter the learned Court below treated the said petition of complaint as a FIR under section 156(3) Cr.PC and sent the same to the Police for investigation. After necessary investigation the Police started a case being Nakashipara, PS. Case No.24 dated 17,8.72 under sections 406/408/465/466/468/477A/201/120B of the...
Smt. Parvati Adhikari Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-14-2000
Reported in: (2001)1CALLT436(HC)
R.K. Mazumder, J.1. The instant Criminal revlsional application under sections 401 and 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is at the instance of the Convict-Petitioner Smt. Parvatl Adhikari and this is directed against the order of conviction and sentence dated 30,4.91 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge, second Court, Nadla in Criminal Appeal No. 25/ 90 affirming the order of conviction and sentence of rigorous Imprisonment for six months and of payment of a fine of Rs. 1200/- in default to suffer further R.I for two months as passed by the learned SDJM, Ranaghat In G.R. Case No. 893 of 1985 (T.R. No. 299 of 1987) on 30.8.90.2. The case of the Convict-Petitioner Smt. Parvatl Adhikari was In brief that on 22.11.85 the defacto-complainant informant Suit. Maya Ghosh lodged a written complaint against the petitioner and two others alleging Infer alia that her son Tarak aged about 18 years, who was born dumb and lame, was taken to the Petitioner for his medical treatment and c...
Jiban Krishna Das Vs. Renu Das and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-14-2000
Reported in: (2001)1CALLT463(HC),II(2001)DMC383
ORDERR.K. Mazumder, J.1. The Instant Criminal revisional application under sections 401 and 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is at the Instance of the husband-petitioner Shrl Jibankrishna Das and this Is directed against the order dated 29.4.2000 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 4th Court, Howrah in Misc. Case No. 284 of 1998 under section 125 of the Code by which the learned Court below allowed maintenance at the rate of Rs. 900/- per month to the O.P. No.1 wife Smt. Renu Das.2. The case of the husband-petitioner was In brief that he married O.P. No.1-Smt. Renu Das long lime back according to Hindu rites and custonis and that out of this said wedlock two sons and one daughter were born. The daughter was 18 years old and the two sons were aged 21 years and 23 years old respectively at the relevant time. Out of his income from a tailoring shop business, the petitioner purchased a plot of land and constructed a house comprising two rooms, one bathroom and one privy. But un...
Jai Kumar Kankaria Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-14-2000
Reported in: [2001]251ITR707(Cal)
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J. 1. In this matter I do not find on record any affidavit-in-opposition. However, Mr. Shome has shown me a copy of the same. He cannot say as to whether the same has been filed in the Department or not. Dr. Pal upon instruction says that no copy of such affidavit-in-opposition has been served upon the learned advocate-on-record of his client. Anyway, when the copy is made available to the court, it would be prudent for the court to take note of it forgetting the procedural aspect. So, a copy thereof is to be kept on record. 2. In this matter, the point is very simple, as to whether the withdrawal of recognition granted to the Secretary, Society for Integral Development programme, under Section 35CCA of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in the case of donation to the aforesaid institution is permissible with retrospective effect or not. 3. The writ petitioner's case is that pursuant to the approval granted by the income-tax authorities the writ petitioner donated a sum o...
Sunil Sardar Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-13-2000
Reported in: AIR2001Cal72
ORDERD.K. Seth, J.1. The first writ petition was moved by one Sunil Sardar, a member of the Panchayat challenging the meeting requisitioned by the private respondents for removal of the Pradhan on the ground that 3 of the requisitionists were disqualified Under Section 11(e) of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973 and a resolution having been taken to that effect the same was forwarded to the prescribed authority for appropriate action. Therefore, the said 3 persons were disqualified from requisitioning the meeting. As such the notice for holding the meeting should be quashed.2. In the said writ petition an interim order was granted that the meeting may be held the result may be published and the same may be given effect to. Subsequently, the second writ petition (A.S.T. 4087 of 2000) was moved by one Jahide Seikh who is also a member of the said Panchayat. It is almost the same relief that was asked for in the second writ petition as was asked for in the first writ petition and almost ...
Kuber Khaini Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Prabhoolal Ramratan Das Pvt. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-13-2000
Reported in: 2002(24)PTC135(Cal)
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J.1. This is an application filed by the petitioner inter alia for infringement of the petitioner's Registered Trade Mark by using a trade mark and/or label whichresembles that of the petitioner and further from infringing the petitioner's copyright registered under No. A-55610/99 and further from passing off or attempting to pass or intending to pass off the design of the petitioner including the copyright and colour scheme as of the respondents.2. The facts of the case are as follows :'The petitioner is a private limited company which duly took over the proprietorship concern of M/s. Kuber International (India) with all its assets and liabilities. By virtue of such taking over of the said company the petitioner is now carrying on business of manufacturer and marketing of khaini, chewing tobacco, pan masatas, gutkhas etc. and the said proprietorship concern merged with the petitioner in or about June, 1999. The petitioner's case is that the petitioner has a disti...
Leonhardt Andra Und Partner, Gmbh Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-12-2000
Reported in: (2001)167CTR(Cal)576,[2001]249ITR418(Cal)
S.N. Bhattacharjee J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following questions have been referred to this court :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a true interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Indo-German agreement for double taxation, prior to its amendment in 1984, the sums received by the assessee for design and technical services for the construction work, i.e., the second bridge over the river Hooghly is chargeable to income-tax under the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a true interpretation of the Indo-German agreement for double taxation, the transfer of the drawings, designs and technical services under the collaboration agreement constituted an out and out transfer of such rights and as such the sums received therefor could be treated as royalty for the purpose of the Indo-German Double Taxation Agreement and liable to Indian Income-ta...
Peerless Consultancy Service (P.) Ltd. Vs. Ashoka Agencies
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-12-2000
Reported in: AIR2001Cal419
Amitava Lala, J. 1. The aforesaid two appeals have been preferred against the self-same order passed by the learned trial Judge on 27-6-2000 in disposing of a company petition being Company Petition No. 384 of 1993. 2. The Peerless Consultancy Service (P.) Ltd. is the appellant is in one appeal whereas; Ashoka Agency, is the appellant in the other appeal. When some arguments were advanced on the question of grant of interim relief, the learned counsel for the parties submitted before us that both the appeals can be disposed of by treating the same as on day's list instead of hearing the application for grant of interim relief. That being the stand takes by the parties before us. We decided to take up the hearing of the appeals and now both the appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment. Ashoka Agency had made an application under the Companies Act, 1956 for winding up of the Peerless Consultancy Services (P.) Ltd. By the impugned order the learned trial Judge came to a findi...
Seth Soorajmal Jalan Balika Vidyalaya (Secondary School) and anr. Vs. ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-12-2000
Reported in: [2001(89)FLR372],(2001)ILLJ1249Cal
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. In this writ application the school authority has challenged the order dated February 25, 2000 passed by the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') directing payment of Rs. 35,611/- alongwith interest at the rate of 10% towards gratuity payable to the private respondent who was admittedly a teacher of the school.2. Mr. Biswas, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has contended that a teacher of a school is not an 'employee' within the meaning of Section 2(e) of the Act and as such the authority below exceeded its jurisdiction in passing the order impugned herein by conferring monetary benefit to the private respondent which she is not authorised to get under law. Mr. Biswas in this connection relies upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Ms. A Sundarambal v. Govt. of Goa, Duman and Diu and Ors., reported in : (1989)ILLJ61SC . He also relies upon another decision of ...
Sahana Mukherjee Vs. Union Bank of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-12-2000
Reported in: (2001)166CTR(Cal)532
K.J. Sengupta, J.In view of the order passed by me in the previous writ petition being No. W.P. 6819(W)/99 (Prabir Kumar Mukherjee v. Union Bank of India & Ors. (2001) 21 DTC 591 (Cal-HC)). I am of the view that recovery of the amount in this matter under section 226(3) has become unwarranted under the law. Admittedly there is no due against the writ petitioner. On account of the alleged dues of her father the amount in question in this writ petition has been withdrawn from the joint account. I, hold that the steps taken by the respondents in this matter is not justified under the law. Accordingly, I direct the respondent-authority to refund a sum of Rs. 9,623 together with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum which shall be calculated from the date of withdrawal. However, the aforesaid amount after receipt shall be kept in a short-term fixed deposit not less than the period of six months. The aforesaid fixed deposit shall not be encashed before three months from date. In the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »