Kolkata Court August 2002 Judgments

Birendra Kumar Bhowmick Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR2003Cal65

Ashok Kumar Mathur, C.J. 1. This public interest litigation has been filed by the petitioner praying for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent No. 1, their agents, servants, officers, and subordinates to enumerate systematically each caste-wise enumeration in Census-2001 AD for all castes in detail, about their place of birth, particulars, nationality, literacy, income, occupation whether in administration and or in any educational institution in the State or professional institutions or private or public, or if a drop-out, if are from the minority communities or is an alien or friendly or enemy, infiltraters or foreigners or belongs to any religious groups or is an handicapped, of any groups OBC/ST/SC or are in under the services of local authorities. In sum total the prayer of the petitioner was that during the Census operation when enumeration of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes is done, enumeration of OBC should also be undertaken during the census operation. The petiti...

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Krishna Khatua and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: III(2004)ACC176,2003ACJ1974

Aloke Chakrabarti, J.1. This appeal was filed challenging the award dated 12.5.2000 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal on a petition under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, granting statutory compensation of Rs. 50,000 and the insurance was directed to pay the said amount according to the direction contained in the impugned judgment.2. Facts available on records are that on 6.3.1998, a Trekker carrying the victim along with marriage party while coming back was moving at a very high speed and in a rash and negligent manner when it suddenly overturned causing the death of the victim on the spot. The insurance coverage is not under dispute but it has been stated by appellant insurance company that the risk covered by the said insurance agreement was in respect of all persons covered by the expression 'third party' and as the deceased was one of the two owners of the Trekker his dependants are not entitled to payment of compensation from the insurance company.3. Mr. D...

Arindam Ghosh and anr. Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2003)1CALLT283(HC)

A.K. Mathur, C.J. 1. This is an appeal directed against the order passed by a learned single Judge dated 23.05.2002 whereby the learned single Judge has allowed the writ petition and restrained the Collector of Excise from allowing the respondent Nos. 7 & 8 to run the Foreign Liquor 'off shop at 28, Hem Chandra Naskar Road, Beliaghata, Kolkata-10. The learned single Judge directed the respondent Nos. 7 & 8 to stop running of the liquor shop forthwith at the present site. He further directed that respondent Nos. 7 & 8 may offer any alternative site after following the mandate of law and the Excise Authorities would make proper enquiry in accordance with law and conclude the same within four weeks and thereafter take appropriate decision in the matter. Aggrieved against this order the present appeal has been filed by the respondent Nos. 7 & 8.2. Brief facts which give rise to this appeal are that the writ petitioner challenged the site on which Foreign Liquor 'off shop licence was grante...

Joint Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shyama Prasad Agarwal

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata

1. to 6. [ These paras are not reproduce here as they involve minor issues].7. The second ground of appeal is relating to the addition of Rs. 36,200 on account of valuation of stock of shares. The assessee in the past had carried on business of trading in shares. Certain shares were held as stock-in-trade and assessee was following the method of cost or market price whichever is lower for valuation of closing stock. In the year under appeal, it is not disputed that, no trading activity was carried on by the assessee in respect of the shares and, accordingly, there has neither been purchases nor sales in shares in the year under appeal. The assessee is also holding some shares as investments from which dividend has been received. Since there was no trading in shares, no trading account was drawn in respect of such activity. The assessee, however, revalued the stock of shares on the basis of cost or market price whichever was lower and claimed the loss on account of fall in the value of...

Baul Sarkar Vs. Smt. Mina Chakraborty

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2003)1CALLT585(HC)

J.K. Biswas, J.1. This is an appeal filed against the judgment and order dated 26th March, 1999 passed by Shyamal Kumar Sen, J. (as His Lordship then was). It was passed on a writ petition which had been registered in this Court under Civil Order No. 17829(W) of 1996. The said writ petition had been filed by the respondent No. 1 herein.2. By the said judgment and order the learned Judge directed the State-respondents to regularise, with effect from 17th November 1992, the appointment of respondent No. 1 in the post of Matron at 'Alipore Vidyamandir', Post Office: Nimta, Calcutta-700 049 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said school); and to give her all the consequential benefits.3. The appellant, who felt aggrieved by the said judgments and order was, however, not a party to the said writ petition. On application, leave was granted to the appellant to prefer the present appeal against the said judgment and order.4. The said writ petition was filed challenging a decision dated 18th Sept...

Assistant Cit Vs. Vinod Rai H. Parekh

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata

Reported in: (2002)77TTJ(Kol.)50

The department has preferred this appeal against the order dated 19-9-1996, passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the matter of an order under section 143(3)/154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1989-90.The issue involved in this appeal is with regard to the charging of interest under sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. The assessing officer did not charge interest under sections 234A, 234B and 234C while completing the assessment under section 143(3) vide his order dated 29-3-1990. Later on, the assessing officer passed an order under section 154 of the Act charging interest under the aforesaid sections by saying that there was a mistake on the part of the assessing officer for not charging interest under the aforesaid sections at the time of passing the original assessment order under section 143(3)/250, dated 2-12-1993. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) directed the assessing officer to delete the element of interest charged under sections 234A, 234B ...

Assistant Commissioner of Income Vs. Vinod Rai H. Parekh

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata

1. The Department has preferred this appeal against the order dt. 19th Sept., 1996, passed by the CIT(A) in the matter of an order under Section 143(3)/154 of the IT Act, 1961, for the asst. yr. 1989-90.2. The issue involved in this appeal is with regard to the charging of interest under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. The Assessing Officer (AO) did not charge interest under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C while completing the assessment under Section 143(3) vide his order dt.29th March, 1990. Later on, the AO passed an order under Section 154 of the Act charging interest under the aforesaid sections by saying that there was a mistake on the part of the AO for not charging interest under the aforesaid sections at the time of passing the original assessment order under Section 143(3)7250, dt. 2nd Dec., 1993. On appeal, the CIT(A) directed the AO to delete the element of interest charged under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C by forming an opinion that when the assessee was having a s...

The New Red Bank Tea Company Private Limited Vs. Jahar Roy

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: II(2003)BC267,(2003)1CALLT310(HC),[2003]45SCL429(Cal)

J.K. Biswas, J. 1. The sole respondent in this appeal, as petitioning-creditor, filed the Company Petition No. 324 of 2001. It was filed under Sections 433, 434 and 439 of the Companies Act, 1956. By the order dated 26th November 2001 the learned Company Judge admitted the said company petition for a sum of Rs. 10,36,353.83. Aggrieved by that order the company has preferred the present appeal.2. The case made out in the respondent's said company petition was as follows:From the year 1985 the respondent had been supplying agro-chemical products to the appellant-company. The parties started maintaining mutual and open current accounts. The appellant-company used to make part payments of the outstanding bill amounts. Following the system, that came to be established between the parties over the years, by a letter dated 21st May 1997 the respondent sent to the appellant-company the statement of accounts' showing an outstanding balance of Rs. 6,22,433.47 payable as on 31st March 1997 by the...

Summit Usha MartIn Finance Ltd. Vs. Jagjit Singh and anr.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2002)3CALLT421(HC)

Amitava Lala, J.1. This is an application for contempt for violation of the order passed by this Court on 23rd September, 1999.2. It appears from the order dated 23rd September, 1999 that in an application arising out of arbitration matter, a Receiver was appointed by the Court for making an inventory in respect of vehicle and to take symbolic possession. A prayer for injunction was also granted by the Court.3. The entire gammut of the application is that the respondent in non-cooperative with the Receiver and failed and/or refused to produce the vehicle to the petitioner in compliance with the order and allow to make an inventory. Initially a Rule of contempt was issued on 13th October, 1999, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner submitted that unless and until order for physical possession of the vehicle by the Receiver is passed, the entire effort of the petitioner will be frustrated. Upon being satisfied with such submission, an order of taking physical possession of the ve...

Arup Kumar Mukherjee Vs. Regional Institute of Printing Technology and ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR2003Cal40

ORDERNarayan Chandra Sil, J.1. The present revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order impugned dated 26-11-2001 passed by the Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) First Court. Alipore in connection with title suit No. 206 of 1974. Mr. Soumen Sen appearing for the plaintiff/petitioner submits before me that the suit was decreed by the Learned Trial Judge thereafter it was slightly modified by the first appellate Court and in the second appeal the judgment of the Learned Trial Court was confirmed. Mr. Sen then argues that when the said decree for damages was put into execution it appeared that the amount of such damage came up to about Rs. 20 lacks for which the Learned Executing Court refused to pass any order for execution. In this connection Mr. Sen has referred to the Hon'ble Full Bench decision of the High Court at Calcutta in the case of Bidyadhar Bachar v. Manindra Nath Das : AIR1925Cal1076 , as appeared from the xerox copy...