Kolkata Court July 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.
Badal Dhara and ors. Vs. Calcutta Municipal Corporation and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-04-2002
Reported in: (2003)1CALLT386(HC)
A.K. Mathur, C.J. 1. This is an appeal directed against an order passed by the learned single Judge dated 7th March, 2002 whereby the learned single Judge has allowed the writ petition and directed that the Corporation shall give at least two months' time to the private respondents to remove such unauthorised constructions and in default it shall take such steps to remove the same at the cost of the private respondents. It is further directed that if it is held that part sanction of the construction can be granted, the Corporation shall accordingly grant such part sanction and direct the private respondents to remove the remaining part of the erection made within a period of one month, in default, it shall be the obligation of the Corporation to remove the same at the cost of the private respondents. Aggrieved against this order the present appeal has been filed by the appellant.2. The brief facts which are necessary for disposal of the appeal are that the private respondents though wa...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. United Credit Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-03-2002
Reported in: (2002)177CTR(Cal)351,[2002]257ITR443(Cal)
1. The questions referred to us are as follows :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in its view that the assessee could follow the cash system of accounting in respect of interest income and continue to follow the mercantile system of accounting in respect of interest expenditure ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in deleting the additions of Rs. 44,90,434 and Rs. 25,44,968 for the assessment years 1987-88 and 1988-89, respectively ?'2. The second question is consequential to the first ; in the relevant assessment years which came before the amendment of Section 145, the assessee followed in regard to the head of interest, a mercantile system of debiting its own liability to pay interest, and a cash system in regard to showing receipts only for cash interest actually received.3. As against one case decided by the Madras High Court cited on behalf of the Department, num...
Sri Adip Kumar Banerjee Vs. the State Fisheries Development Corpn. Ltd ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-02-2002
Reported in: (2003)1CALLT221(HC),[2003(97)FLR878]
M.H.S. Ansari, J.1. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was employed by the State Fisheries Development Corporation, respondent herein (for short Corporation) as its company Secretary by appointment letter dated December 26/29, 1988. The appointment was temporary and petitioner was on probation for a period of one year from the date of appointment, which may be extended, depending on performance and efficiency. The appointment was terminable during the probationary period if the petitioner's performance was not found to be satisfactory.2. The service of the petitioner for confirmation became due on January 12, 1990 and a proposal was placed before the Board for confirmation. However, by letter dated May 30, 1990, petitioner was informed as under;'The Board of Directors in its 118th meeting held on 15th February, 1990 considered your case and decided to extend your probation periodfor another 6 months subject to review of your performance after 3 months. But even during this...
Nitha Ranjan Chakraborty Vs. Smt. Kalpana Chakraborty
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-02-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)11,2002CriLJ4768,II(2003)DMC142
ORDERMalay Kumar Basu, J.1. This revisional application is directed against the judgment and order dated 24th August, 2001 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 6th Court, Alipore in its revisional jurisdiction in Crl. Motion No. 209/2001. By the said order, the learned Additional Sessions Judge allowed the revisional application which was filed against the judgment and order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, dated 23th March, 2001 in T.R. No. 295/1999 whereunder the learned Magistrate allowed the petition Under Section 125, Cr.P.C. in part awarding a sum of Rs. 1,200/- per month in favour of the wife with effect from the date of order i.e. 23rd March, 2001. Being aggrieved by that order, the wife had filed the said revisional application on the ground that the order ought to have taken effect from the date of application and not from the date of order. The learned Additional Sessions Judge accepted this contention of the revisional applicant wife and...
West Bengal Board of Secondary Education and ors. Vs. Subir Dutta and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-01-2002
Reported in: (2002)3CALLT179(HC)
J.K. Biswas, J. 1. Since the relevant facts as also the questions of law are identical in all these four appeals, we have heard them analogously; and we propose to decide them by this common judgment.2. These four appeals arise out of four writ petitions filed by and on behalf of 102 students of four secondary schools recognized by the appellant Board. The appellant Board had refused to register the students' names for allowing them to appear at the Madhyamik Pariksha (Secondary Examination), 2002 from the said four schools. The ground was: the students had earlier got their names registered for the said examination from some other schools. This dispute led to the filing of the writ petitions.3. In writ petition Nos. 18220(W) of 2001 and 18221(W) of 2001 a learned Judge of this Court passed two identical interim orders, both dated 9th January 2002, and those have been impugned in M.A.T. Nos. 308 of 2002 and 309 of 2002 respectively. Another learned Judge of this Court by one judgment a...
Indian Petro Chemical Corporation Limited Vs. Khaitan Transport Compan ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-01-2002
Reported in: (2003)1CALLT437(HC)
D.K. Seth, J. 1. This appeal is directed against Order No. 31 dated 26th November, 1997 passed by the learned Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Calcutta, in Misc. Case No. 183 of 1993 returning the award and the plaint in T. S. No. 1975 of 1992 for making the award rule of the Court together with the objection filed by the appellant under Sections 30 and 33 the Arbitration Act, 1940 (1940 Act) in Misc. Case No. 183 of 1993. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant points out that in view of Section 31(4) of the Arbitration Act, 1940, all applications are to be filed before the same Court where one of the applications was initially filed. According to him, an application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 was filed before this Court on the basis whereof proceeding was proceeded and the award was passed. Therefore, in the suit, being Title Suit No. 1975 of 1992, seeking decree on the award, the appellant had filed an objection under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›