Kolkata Court March 2000 Judgments
Ananda Swarup Agarwal and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-28-2000
Reported in: AIR2000Cal222,2000(119)ELT536(Cal)
ORDERK.J. Sengupta, J. 1. By this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs : '(a) A writ of or in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent and, in particular, Respondent No. 2, to rescind, recall and cancel the said order dated 25-3-1996 passed by the respondent No. 2 being Annexure 'I'. (b) Writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to rescind, recall or cancel the memo No. NIL dated 12-11-1992 issued by the respondent No. 2 and also directing the respondent not to act or further act upon the same. (c) A writ in the nature of certiorari directing the respondent to certify and transit to this Hon'ble Court records and recordings in respect of proposal for grant of SSI registration certificate to your petitioner for manufacture of colour TV by the petitioner No. 2 as a Small Scale Industrial Unit including in particular, the notice dated 12-11-1992 and order dated 25-3-1996 so that the same may be quashed and appropriate order and/or dire...
Tag this Judgment!Pacific Carriers Limited Vs. M/S. Singhee Marine Services Pvt. Ltd. an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-27-2000
Reported in: (2000)3CALLT216(HC)
V.K. Gupta, J.1. The appeal is directed against the Judgment dated 19.11.99 passed by learned single Judge of this Court in Admiralty Suit No. 3 of 1999 whereby learned single Judge passed a decree for a sum of Rs. 32.00 lakhs in favour of Respondent No. 1 and against the appellant. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present appeal are as given herein below :2. The appellant is the owner of ship 'MV-NELSON'. This Ship is a foreign Vessel registered in MONROVIA, Liburia (Greece) and files the flag of St. Vincent. The appellant is a Company incorporate under the Corporate Laws of Singapore and has its registered Office at Singapore. Respondent No. 2Multimedia Maritime Private Limited was appointed as the Agent of the Appellant in respect of the Appellant's Ship's activities after its arrival in the Port of Calcutta. On 6th February, 1999 Respondent No. 2, as authorised by the Appellant engaged Respondent No. 1 to supply and place sufficient numbers of barges lighters alongside ...
Tag this Judgment!Turner Morrison and Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-27-2000
Reported in: (2001)165CTR(Cal)451,[2000]245ITR724(Cal)
1. The following six questions form the subject-matter of this reference :'1. Whether the finding of the Tribunal that the sum of Rs. 49,599was the income of the assessee from undisclosed sources is based on anymaterial and/or was arrived at by ignoring the relevant materials and/oris perverse ? 2. Whether the sum of Rs. 49,599 could be treated as the assessee's income from undisclosed sources of the relevant previous year ? 3. Whether the finding of the Tribunal that the sum of Rs. 12,507 spent on legal expenses in respect of Habra land was not in connection with the assessee's business and/or was a capital expenditure is based on any material and/or was arrived at by ignoring the relevant materials and/ or is perverse ? 4. Whether the sum of Rs. 12,507 incurred on account of legal expenses for the said Harba land was an allowable deduction ? 5. Whether the finding of the Tribunal that the sum of Rs. 15,40,264 was not an allowable deduction and/or could not be allowed during the previ...
Tag this Judgment!Everett (India) Private Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-27-2000
Reported in: (2002)IILLJ477Cal
Ajoy Nath Ray, J.1. At the time of hearing of the application for extension of the interim order, which was granted from time to time only for limited periods, the writ application itself appeared to be ready for hearing and was taken up by consent of parties. It appears that ESI Contribution has not been paid by the writ petitioner company for an inordinately long period of 12 years from 1983 to 1995. The ESI Authorities also did not initiate any assessment recovery proceedings for the said large length of time.2. It is only for the first time in or about the month of March, 1999 that notices were issued by the ESI Authorities pointing out to the writ petitioner company the defaults in the making of contribution and the defaults in the making of return. Although Mr. Sengupta appearing for the Union of Workers once submitted that the aggregate of these notices is around Rupees 62 lakhs, yet the exact computation was not given to Court by the parties.3. Immediately on receipt of the not...
Tag this Judgment!Eastern Coalfields Ltd. and ors. Vs. Amaresh Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-24-2000
Reported in: (2000)3CALLT130(HC)
S. K. Sen, J.1. This appeal fs directed against the Judgment and order of the learned single Judge dated March 25, 1997 whereby the learned Judge allowed the writ petition and held that the petitioner has been dismissed from service in utter violation of natural Justice. Rules contained in CTA Rules, Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India, and quashed the order of dismissal. By the said order, the learned Judge further directed the. respondents to pay the salaries of the writ petitioner from the date of dismissal till the date of Judgment within six weeks from date.2. The short facts Involved in this appeal inter alia are that the writ petitioner/respondent No. 1 at the relevant time was the Manager of Central Kajora Colliery (ECL), a subsidiary of Coal India Ltd. on 11.11.1994 at about 8.20 A.M. In the first shift the Pump Khalasl Khlrod Ghosh reported that one winding engine Khalasl was present at pit No.2. As such, the petitioner/ respondent No. 1 and Kirod Ghosh went to No.2 p...
Tag this Judgment!Kousher Ali Laskar Vs. Moslema Bibi and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-24-2000
Reported in: I(2001)DMC350
Ranjan Kumar Mazumdar, J.1. The instant criminal revisional application under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is at the instance of Shri Kousher Ali @ Kousher Ali Laskar, the petitioner, who happened to be the husband of opposite party No. 1-Moslema Bibi and this is directed against the order dated 14.9.1998 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Howrah in Criminal Motion No. 1 of 1998.2. The case of the petitioner was in brief that his wife being opposite party No. 1-Moslema Bibi filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Uluberia, Howrah, claiming maintenance for herself. The said misc. case being Misc. Case No. 101/95 was disposed of by the learned Magistrate concerned on 12.7.1996 with a direction that the petitioner should pay maintenance at the rate of Rs. 750/ - per month to opposite party No. 1-wife from the date of order, viz. 12.7.1996. Since the peti...
Tag this Judgment!Jahar Dey Vs. Smt. Brojeshwari Saha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-2000
Reported in: AIR2000Cal280
Gorachand De, J. 1. This revisional application is directed against the Order dated 9-9-1999 passed by Shri S.K. Prasad, Civil Judge (Senior Division), ninth Court, Alipore in Misc. Appeal No. 148 of 1997. By the said order the learned Judge dismissed the Misc. Appeal and confirmed the Order No. 55 dated 17-7-1993 passed in Title Suit No. 394 of 1985 of the Court of Second Munsif at Alipore .2. The plaintiff opposite party instituted a suit for eviction of the present petitioner from the suit property mainly on the ground of default in payment of monthly rent since Sept. 1984. The defendant petitioner entered appearance and filed application under Sections 17(1) and 17(2) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act. On 21-3-1989 the suit was heard ex parte and decreed in favour of the plaintiff. In 15-9-1990 the defendant petitioner filed an application under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure alleging inter alia, that he was not properly informed of the date of hearing by his...
Tag this Judgment!Nawal Kishor Singh Vs. Sanjib Gupta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-2000
Reported in: (2001)2CALLT29(HC)
Altamas Kabir, J.1. Having regard to the nature of the facts involved, by consent of the parties the appeal is treated as on day's list and is taken up for hearing along with the application for stay of operation of the order dated 22nd March, 1999 passed by the learned single Judge in C.O. No. 3517(W) of 1996.2. The said writ application was filed by Shri Sanjib Gupta, the respondent No. 1 in this appeal, challenging the Office Memorandum dated 12th February 1996 issued by the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), 24-Parganas (North), approving the second panel prepared by the authorities of the Barrackpore Wesley Hindustani High School, hereinafter referred to as the 'said school', pursuant to the directions given by the District Inspector of Schools. 3. According to the writ petitioner respondent No. 1 on a Newspaper publication dated 15th April, 1986, made by the said school inviting applications for selection to the post of second clerk, the petitioner applied for filling up the s...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Ltd. Vs. Samir Biswas and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-22-2000
Reported in: (2000)3CALLT42(HC)
M.K. Basu, J.1. This appeal is admitted for hearing. The appellant is aggrieved of an order dated 13.1.2000 passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court Xth Bench, Calcutta whereby, in a pending application filed under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the learned trial Court had granted an ex parte ad-interim injunction against the appellant and in favour of the respondent restraining the appellant from seizing and/or taking possession of the vehicle forming the subject matter of the aforesaid petition, on the terms contained in that order.2. The sole ground urged by the learned Advocate appearing for the appellant against the aforesaid order is that the learned Court below had no jurisdiction to entertain the application under section 9 of the 1996 Act and therefore, on that ground alone, it had not Jurisdiction whatsoever to pass any interim order. The argument is that no petition under section 9 (supra) was maintainable because of the total absence of any Ar...
Tag this Judgment!Bhaswati Sarkar (Nee Mukhopadhyay) Vs. Angshuman Sarkar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-21-2000
Reported in: AIR2000Cal210,II(2001)DMC237
ORDERPrabir Kumar Samanta, J. 1. This Revisional Application is directed against the Order No. 12 dated 23-6-99 passed by the Court of 4th Additional District Judge, Barasat, 24-Parganas (North) in Matrimonial Suit No. 10 of 1991. By the said order the petition filed by the husband-respondent was allowed by permitting the husband-Opposite Party to undergo medical examination at any Government Hospital or by any other expert at his own costs. choice and responsibility. 2. The wife-petitioner instituted a proceeding under Sections 24(ii) and 27(i)(d) of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 against the husband-opposite party alleging inter alia that the opposite party was impotent at the time of marriage, and continued to be so during their joint living and till the date of institution of the proceeding rendering the marriage as void and null. Husband-opposite party entered appearance in the said suit and filed written statement denying the allegations made therein. It was specifically denied t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »