Kolkata Court February 2002 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.
Indian Bank Vs. Central Government Industrial Tribunal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-26-2002
Reported in: [2002(95)FLR83],(2003)ILLJ331Cal
D.K. Seth, J. The question: 1. In the present case a dispute was raised between the workmen and the employer. Ultimately, the impugned award was passed on July 13, 1998 on the basis of an agreement between the parties incorporating the terms thereof. From the award, it was pointed out that the counsel for the employer had no objection regarding the passing of the award in terms of the conditions contained in Annexure 'B' (Ex. W/2) to the application for compromise. The award had incorporated the terms of compromise as part of the award (Annexure 'A') after having examined and found the said terms and conditions as legal and fair. It is now being challenged on the ground that this award is not an award in the eye of law, since it has not adjudicated the alleged dispute. In the alleged dispute, there was no relationship of employer and employee and as such, there was no industrial dispute within the meaning of Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as ...
Chandan Chakraborty and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-25-2002
Reported in: (2003)(2)SLJ245CAT
1. The short question that falls for decision in this O.A. is whether the applicants (43 in number), who are working as Data Entry Operators under the respondents and who have not been extended the benefit of revised scale of pay of Rs. 1350-2200/- w.e.f. 1.1.86 whereas the same was granted to the similarly situated employees pursuant to the decisions of different Benches of the Tribunal including the Calcutta Bench, can be denied similar relief simply on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay in filing the O.A.? It is, therefore, to be seen whether the principle of law on this issue is sufficient to refuse the relief in favour of the applicants and whether such refusal will amount to injustice to them.The applicants were initially recruited as Operators in the Directorate of Census Operations, West Bengal in the year 1982-84. These posts were later redesignated as Data Entry Operators, Gr. B. The applicants' case is that they have been given revised pay scale of Rs. 1350-2200...
Shaw Wallace and Co. Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Cit
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-25-2002
Reported in: (2003)86ITD315(Kol.)
These cross appeals are against the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) for the assessment year 1994-95. For the sake of convenience, they are being disposed of by this common order.The first ground raised in assessee's appeal is that the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in holding the view that the separate assessment can be made under the provisions of section 143(3) of the Act in respect of an assessment year falling within the block period after the search is made under section 132 of the Act. In this case, the search and seizure action was taken on 27-8-1996 and the assessment was made by the assessing officer on 31-3-1997. A block assessment was also made covering this period by the assessing officer and the income assessed for this year was excluded from the block assessment and that view was upheld by the Calcutta High Court in the assessee's own case reported in Dy. CIT v. Shaiv Wallace & Co. Ltd. (2001) 248 ITR 81 (Cal), wherein it was held that an assessment under section ...
Jasoda Debi Vs. Ramchandra Shaw and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-25-2002
Reported in: (2002)2CALLT367(HC),2002(4)CHN49
H. Banerji, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the appellate order passedby the learned Additional District Judge, 14th Court, Alipore whereby he set aside the order of dismissal dated August 8, 1979 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, 7th Court, Alipore in Title Suit No. 98 of 1974. The suit is one for declaration of the plaintiff's right of pre-emption in respect of the suit property and for specific performance of contract.2. The plaint case is that one Ramcharit Shaw who owned premises Nos. 7/4, 7/5 and part of 9, Munsigaunge Road, P.S.-- Watgaunge, died in the year 1966 leaving his three sons including the plaintiff who jointly inherited the property in equal share. By a registered deed of partition executed on March 31, 1968 the inherited property was partitioned amongst the three brothers. It was provided in the deed of partition that if any of the parties intended to sell his allotted property he would intimate the others about his intention to sell and the other partie...
Nirmal Kumar Jana Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-22-2002
Reported in: (2002)3CALLT270(HC),I(2003)DMC495
P.K. Biswas, J.1. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is present.2. This is an application under Section 401/482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed at the instance of Nirmal Kumar Jana, the petitioner herein, against the opposite party seeking to set aside the impugned order No. 63 dated 20th September, 1995 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Court, Contai in Misc.(P)2 of 1995 (T.R. No. 43/95) under Section 127 of the Criminal Procedure Code.3. The short facts leading to the filing of this revisional application are as under:Rs. 175/- per month was awarded in favour of the wife/opposite party by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Contai against the present petitioner on the basis of the application filed under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code by the wife/opposite party.4. Immediately, after passing of the aforesaid award on 27.5.86 both the petitioner and the wife/opposite party resolved to effect a private settlement by way of a compromise petitio...
Ratan Kumar Sahu and Asit Kumar Mondal Vs. State of West Bengal and or ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-21-2002
Reported in: (2002)3CALLT391(HC)
A.K. Banerjee, J. 1. The aforesaid two cases involve common question of fact and law and as such I intend to dispose of the aforesaid two matters by a common judgment.The writ petitioners in both these matters were implicated in criminal cases on the basis of FIR lodged by the Enforcement Branch for irregularities found on surprise check in the shops and godowns belonging to the writ petitioners. It was alleged that there had been serious discrepancies of recording of stock. There had been seizure of 60 bundles of corrugated sheets in case of the first writ petition and 506 bags salt in case of second writ petitioner.The short question raised in these two writ petitions are as to whether the respondent authority was empowered to lodge such FIR on the basis of West Bengal Declaration of Stock and Prices of Essential Commodities Order, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as the said Order, 1977) when the said Order of 1977 was not in force as according to the writ petitioner the said Order, 19...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Avery India Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-20-2002
Reported in: [2002]255ITR485(Cal)
1. Five assessment years are involved in this reference but we deal with the question with reference to only one of those as a representative and prototype assessment year.2. That one is the assessment year 1976-77.3. The question referred to us is as follows :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in not confirming the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in respect of bad and doubtful debt reserves ?'4. The point whether bad and doubtful debts were correctly classed as reserves by the Tribunal becomes relevant in view of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964.5. Under that Act the capital base of the company has an effect on the incidence of the liability of surtax. The profit remaining the same, the surtax would become lessened as the capital base of the company became broadened.6. It was thus in the interest of the assessee-respondent to emphasize that the bad and doubtful debts also form reserves in the true se...
Md. YasIn Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-20-2002
Reported in: (2002)2CALLT546(HC),2002(2)CHN333
N.A. Chowdhury, J.1. This appeal on behalf of the appellant Md. Yasin, is directed against the judgment and order dated 7.12.90 of conviction and sentence passed by an Additional Session Judge, Asansol in Sessions Case No. 161/87 convicting the appellant on the charges punishable under Sections 376 IPC and 302/34 IPC and sentencing him to RI for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/- in default to suffer RI for a further period of 2 years for his conviction under Section 376 IPC and also sentencing him to imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 5000/- in default to suffer RI for a further period of 3 years of his conviction under Section 302/34 IPC and all the sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently.2. Prosecution case, in brief, it appears, that on 21.4.85, in the evening, one Goutam Das (victim since deceased), aged about 19 years of Puranahat under P.S. Hirapur, along with one girl Amba Bose (victim of gangrape (PW2) aged about 16/17 years, went towards Raham...
Sukomal Sarkar and ors. Vs. Sunil Behari Ghosh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-20-2002
Reported in: (2002)3CALLT204(HC),II(2003)DMC410
P.K. Biswas, J. 1. Mr. Ashim Kr. Roy, learned counsel for the petitioners is present. Heard Mr. Roy at length. None, however, appears on behalf of the opposite party. Let the affidavit of service filed be kept with the record.2. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash the prosecution against the present petitioners under Section 406 IPC, in connection with C.R. Case No. 194 of 1995 pending before the Court of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Alipurduar, Jalpalguri. 3. The short facts leading to the filing of this revisional application are as under:- 4. One Sunil Behari Ghosh made a complaint on 5th June, 1994 before the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Alipurduar, alleging the commission of offence under Section 406 IPC against the present petitioners whereupon C.R. Case No. 194 of 1995 was registered. 5. After receipt of the aforesaid complaint and after examining the complainant and one witness the learned...
Gour Gopal Debnath Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-20-2002
Reported in: (2002)3CALLT384(HC)
P.K. Ray, J.1. Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties.2. In the motion stage, this Court inclined to dispose of the matter in view of very peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, as detailed in the following judgment wherefrom it will appear that there is a gross violation not only of the principles of natural justice but infringement of the statutory provision with reference to the departmental proceeding relating to an employee of a cooperative society. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that a show cause notice was issued on 3.9.2001 by the Secretary of Sree Chaitanya Co-operative Bank Ltd., whereby the petitioner was directed to show cause only on the issue as to why appropriate penal action would not be taken. In this show cause notice nothing has been disclosed about the alleged violation in terms of Rule 14 Appendix to Chapter VI of West Bengal Co-operative Societies Rules, 1987. The petitioner replied on September 8, 2001, denying all the allegations a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »