Kolkata Court September 2000 Judgments
Appropriate Authority and ors. Vs. Chandravadan Desai and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-28-2000
Reported in: [2001]249ITR114(Cal)
S.N. Bhattacharjee, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated January 13, 1994, passed by a single judge of this court in Matter No. 2552 of 1986 (Chandravadan Desai v. Appropriate Authority : [1995]213ITR744(Cal) ).2. The petitioners entered into an agreement dated June 24, 1985, with Ghanshyam Das Thirani, Lansdowne Properties Limited (respondent No. 4) and Onyx Estates Limited to the effect that the petitioners would pay to Thirani a sum of Rs. 13.03 lakhs, to Onyx Rs. 99,150 and to Lansdowne, a sum of Rs. 33,000 for transferring office space Nos. 3, 4, 7 and 8 measuring 4,428 square ft. on the fourth floor along with car parking space in favour of the petitioners in terms of the deed of agreement which is annexure B to the writ petition. The flats were under construction. The petitioners filed Form No. 37EE in terms of requirement under Section 269AB(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), read with Rule 48DD and the Competent ...
Tag this Judgment!Indian Institute of Technology and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-28-2000
Reported in: (2001)ILLJ868Cal
B. Bhattacharya, J.1. In this writ application, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur ('Institute') an authority incorporated under the Indian Institute of Technology (Kharagpur) Act, 1956 and at present governed by the Institute of Technology Act, 1961 has challenged a reference under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 by the State Government to the Industrial Tribunal.2. The following disputes have been referred to the Tribunal 'i) Whether the dismissal from service of one Nirmal Kumar Chanda by the Management of the Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur is justified? ii) What relief, if any, is he entitled to?'3. Without filing any written statement before the Tribunal, the petitioner has straightaway come up with the instant writ application thereby disputing the validity of the reference itself on the grounds that the Institute is not an industrial establishment, nor is the concerned employee a workman within the meaning of Industrial Disputes Act. The petitio...
Tag this Judgment!Sushil Saha and ors. Vs. West Bengal State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-28-2000
Reported in: 2001CriLJ1019
ORDERK.J. Sengupta, J.1. This is an application for contempt of Court alleging violation of my order dated 2nd March, 2000. It is relevant to record the background of this case on which the aforesaid order dated 2nd March, 2000 was passed.2. The petitioners numbering 26 filed a writ petition claiming relief in their permanent absorption in the job which they have been functioning and also for payment of their salaries and other financial benefits.4. The aforesaid order dated 2nd March, 2000 was passed ex parte without any notice being served considering urgency of this matter. The text of the aforesaid order dated 2nd March, 2000 is quoted hereunder.There will be an order of status quo with regard to the status of the petitioners' services as of today for a period of three weeks from date or until further orders whichever is earlier.5. Thereafter, the period of the aforesaid interim order was extended from time to time and such last extension was granted on 27th March, 2000 for a perio...
Tag this Judgment!Electro Urban Co-operative Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2000
Reported in: (2001)76ITD43(Kol.)
1. All these appeals relate to one assessee and as the issues involved herein are common, we propose to dispose of the appeals by a common order for the sake of convenience.2. The appeals filed by the assessee relate to the assessment years 1989-90 to 1992-93 whereas the appeals of the revenue relate to the assessment years 1990-91 to 1992-93.3. The assessee is a co-operative society constituted with the main object of lending the money to its members. Out of membership funds and the deposits collected by the assessee. The society made fixed deposits of a portion of the sum which was not immediately with the CESC Ltd. The members of the assessee-society arc employees of CESC. The interest earned on the fixed deposit made with the CESC was claimed by the assessee as an amount eligible for deduction under section 80-P of the Act on the ground that the interest constituted income from banking business. Moreover, it is the case of the assessee that the interest earned on the aforesaid fix...
Tag this Judgment!Shyamal Chowdhury Vs. Smt. Jyotsna Dutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2000
Reported in: (2001)1CALLT337(HC)
Acts/Rules/Orders:Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Sections 115 and 115A;Indian Oaths Act, 1873 - Sections 8, 9 and 12;Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 227JUDGEMENT S.N. Bhattacharjee, J.1. This revisional application has been preferred against the order No. 8 dated 26.5.98 passed by learned Additional District Judge. 2nd Court at Alipore in Civil Revision No. 295 of 1997 affirming the order dated 13.5.97 passed by the learned 3rd Court of the Assistant District Judge at Alipore in title suit No. 286 of 1986.2. The Opposite Party herein as plaintiff instituted title suit No. 286 of 1986 for declaration of title in the suit property and other reliefs. The dispute between the parlies was whether the suit property standing in the name of the defendant No. 1 was purchased by the defendant himself with his own money or by the plaintiff. The peremptory hearing of the suit was fixed on 9.6.93. On 5.6.93 the plaintiff made an application before the learned trial Judge that the plaintiff an...
Tag this Judgment!Bijan Kumar Barman and ors. Vs. Bhaskar Chandra Barman and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2000
Reported in: AIR2001Cal98,(2001)1CALLT409(HC)
S.N. Bhattacharjee, J.1. The substantive question of law involved in this appeal is whether the first appellate Court while reversing the judgment ofthe trial Court was justified in holding that the Nirupan Patra executed by Dhukhishyam Barman in favour of the appellant No. 1 was a collusive and sham transaction despite the fact that the plaintiff himself derived benefit therefrom.2. The respondent No. 1 herein and his two sisters filed Title Suit No. 66 of 1985 in the trial Court alleging that the appellant No. 1 along with other appellants had been threatening them with dispossession on the basis of a Nirupanpatra purportedly executed by his further, Dukhishyam Barman, dated 5.4.72 although such a deed was vitiated by fraud and under influence as Dukhishyam was aged about 95 years and had been suffering from physical infirmities which rendered him incapable of understanding about the nature of the transaction. The aforesaid Nirupanpatra which seeks to devise and distribute the immova...
Tag this Judgment!Manindralal Karmakar Vs. Akhil Kumar Chandra
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2000
Reported in: (2001)1CALLT428(HC)
S.N. Bhattacharjee, J.1. In this revisional application under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, order No. 173 dated 7.2.96 passed by learned Munsif, 2nd Court at Berhampore in O.S. No. 265 of 1980 whereby the petitioner's application under section 5 of the Limitation Act accompanied with an application under section 148 and 151 CPC was dismissed.2. The petitioner was the defendant in O.S. nO. 265 of 1980, filed by the respondent herein praying for eviction of the petitioner on the ground of default and other grounds. The petitioner got summons on 14.2.81 but could not enter appearance within one month in accordance with section 17(1) of West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act (the said 'Act'). He filed an application under section 17(2A)(b) of the said Act coupled with an application under section 5 of the Limitation Act praying condonation of delay on the ground of illness. The learned trial Judge disbelieved his illness and dismissed the application. The High Court In revision did...
Tag this Judgment!Jannabi Kumar Santra and ors. Vs. Dr. K.M. Hossain, C.M.O.H., Midnapor ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-2000
Reported in: (2001)1CALLT367(HC)
B. Panigrahi, J. 1. This application has been filed under Article 215 of Constitution of India read with provisions of the contempt of Court of 1971 for willful and deliberate disovidence of this Division Benchs order dated 27th August, 1998 in the writ application being W.P.S.T. No. 284 of 1998. These writ petitioners have, inter alia, alleged that they had moved a petition before the State Administrative Tribunal being OA No. 1470 of 1998 for passing a mandate against the alleged contemnors for regularisation of their service. But the learned Administrative Tribunal has directed the respondent No. 2 to dispose of the petitioner's representation by passing a speaking order from the date of communication of the order after giving the representatives of the petitioners an opportunity of being heard. The order so passed shall also be communicated by the respondent No. 2 to the petitioners or their representatives within two weeks from the date of passing of the order. Being aggrieved by ...
Tag this Judgment!Kalyan Banerjee Vs. Kamarhati Municipality and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-2000
Reported in: 2001(3)ARBLR146(Cal)
ORDERPranab Kr. Chattopadhyay, J.1. In the present writ petition it has been submitted by the petitioner that the respondent Kamarhati Municipality placed after on the writ petitioner for printing daily collection challans. Such order we placed by issuing an indent which is annexure 'D' to the writ petition. According to the petitioner in spite of supply of the printing materials t6 the Municipality no payment has been released and the municipal authority by a notification dated 19th July, 1996, being annexure 'J' to the writ petition came to the conclusion that the petitioner tried to deceive the municipality creating a financial trap and for the said reason the enlistment of the petitioner as a supplier of the municipality was also cancelled. All the purchase/supply orders already issued to the petitioner but not being carried out were also treated as cancelled. Kamarhati Municipality also black listed the petitioner as an enlisted contractor/supplier of the Municipality.2. On behalf...
Tag this Judgment!Vikram Poddar Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-2000
Reported in: (2001)IILLJ518Cal
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. In this application, the petitioner, one of the erstwhile Directors of the employer, has challenged an order, dated September 1, 2000, passed by the Recovery Officer, West Bengal, pursuant to notice of show cause issued upon the petitioner for recovery of the Provident Fund dues of the employer concerned. This writ application has been disposed of before asking the respondents to file affidavit because Sri Gupta appearing on behalf of the respondents has produced the entire case record.2. Sri Bhanja Chowdhury, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has, firstly, contended that the entire recovery proceeding was illegal inasmuch as the same was not preceded by any valid order under Section 7-A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, nor was any notice served upon the petitioner prior to the passing of such order.3. From the record produced before this Court, it appears that already an order under Section 7-...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »