Kolkata Court August 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.
Narendra Mohan Lakhotia Vs. Pinaki Bhusan Sinha
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-16-2002
Reported in: [2003]45SCL423(Cal)
Narayan Chandra Sil, J.1. All these three revisional applications under Article 227 of the Constitution of India are taken up together for the purpose of disposal as the questions involved for determination in all those three revisional applications are same and similar.2. The C.O. No. 1235 of 2002 was directed against the impugned order No. 14 dated 18-4-2002 (although in the Cause Title the date of the impugned order has been shown as 23-4-2002) passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (hereinafter referred to as 'Forum'), South 24 Parganas arising out of Execution Case No. 19 of 2001. The C.O. No. 1238 of 2002 was directed against the impugned order No. 14 dated 23-4-2002 passed by the said Forum arising out of Execution Case No. 18 of 2001. The C.O. No. 1259 of 2002 was directed against the impugned order No. 9 dated 23-4-2002 passed by the learned Forum arising out of Execution Case No. 59 of 2001.3. It appears from the record that the O.P. No. 1 was a depo...
Narendra Kumar Anchalia Vs. Krishna Kumar Mundhra
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-2002
Reported in: [2003]42SCL40(Cal)
S.P. Talukdar, J.1. An 'award' dated 18th September, 1998, passed by the Arbitral Tribunal was challenged by the present appellant, as petitioner, by filing an application under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Backdrop of the case may briefly be stated as follows :2. The petitioner and the respondents agreed to enter into a joint venture business and for this, an agreement was executed on 12th May, 1997. They agreed to share the profit and loss in respect of the said business equally. It was further agreed that they would be entitled to withdraw their investments along with the profits after adjustments and settlement of accounts between themselves.3. Disputes and differences cropped up and following the Arbitration Clause in the agreement, the matter was referred to the Arbitrators named in the said agreement. On completion of the Arbitration proceeding, 'award' was published on 18th September, 1998.4. The said 'award' was challenged on various grounds which included p...
Ranjit Kr. Bhattacharya Vs. Tilak Dhari Singh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)CHN712
G.C. De, J.1. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the opposite party No. 2, the State of West Bengal, and on perusal of the materials on records, it transpires that though the learned Magistrate frames charge under Section 120B, Sections 467, 419 & 420 of the IPC., he did not give any particular of the persons with whom the accused persons conspired to do some illegal act viz., forgery. Similarly, in the formal charge, the description of valuable document is also not indicated. These particulars are wanting in the charge head No. 1, framed under Section 120B of the IPC.2. But in the subsequent heads of the charge, the gist of the particulars of the offence is indicated. So, I do not agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner that the charges are not properly framed with regard to the charge-head Nos. 2, 3 and 4. In fact in these heads, materials are sufficient to indicate actually what offence was committed and in which manner.3. As regards charge No. 1, the...
Rajendra Kumar Bachhawat Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-2002
Reported in: (2005)197CTR(Cal)489,[2005]276ITR567(Cal)
1. The assessee paid a sum of Rs. 25 lakhs for development purposes for the purpose of becoming a member of the Calcutta Stock Exchange. In the assessment years in question, viz., 1992-93, 1993-94, the assessee made two types of claims in regard to the said sum.2. First, the assessee's contention was that the amount is by way of revenue expenditure and is not by way of capital expenditure.3. Secondly, the assessee submitted that it was entitled to dissect the revenue expenditure of Rs. 25 lakhs, into 10 equal parts of Rs. 2,50,000 each, and claim deduction thereof in 10 successive assessment years, of which the two assessment years in question were the first two.4. We are of the opinion that this petition of appeal is quite hopeless. No doubt a very enduring benefit was accruing to the assessee on payment of the development charges.5. That would render the expenditure as a capital one. Moreover, we are quite unaware of any authority given in the Income-tax Act, for carrying forward rev...
Britannia Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-13-2002
Reported in: [2002]257ITR681(Cal)
1. This is a petition of appeal under Section 260A seeking to challenge the decision of the Tribunal given on December 12, 2001.2. The sum involved is Rs. 31,38,017 for the assessment year 1994-95, the said sum being claimed by the assessee as expenses for rent, depreciation, repair and maintenance of its guest-house.3. Although it is the stage of mere admission of appeal, the Revenue hotly resisted the admission itself on the twin argument, that--(i) Two Division Bench decisions of the Calcutta High Court given in the cases of C1T v. Upper Ganges Sugar Mills Ltd : [1994]206ITR215(Cal) and Kesoram Industries and Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT : [1991]191ITR518(Cal) squarely cover the issue ; and(ii) The wording of Section 37(4), as operative at the material time is too clear to permit any doubts being had as regards the disallowance of the guesthouse expenditure items.4. Faced with the stiff opposition of the Revenue, Dr. Pal appearing for the assessee, had to place before us numerous author...
A.K. Ghosh and Co. Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-13-2002
Reported in: (2003)1CALLT506(HC)
Asit Kumar Bisi, J.1. The instant application under Sections 30 and 33 of theArbitration Act, 1940 has been filed by the petitioner M/s. A.K. Ghosh & Co. for setting aside the award made by the learned Arbitrator Sri Anil Kumar Sen, former Chief Justice, Calcutta High Court in the matter of arbitration between M/s. A.K. Ghosh & Co. v. State of West Bengal and Anr.2. The case of the petitioner in brief is that he was awarded the work for construction of Rural Family Planning Centre at Barakar in the District of Burdwan. On receipt of the work order the petitioner made endeavour to complete the said work within the stipulated period but due to various breaches and defaults on the part of the department execution of the said work was delayed. The petitioner was able to complete the said word on 14.9.79. Various extra works at the instruction of the department had been executed by the petitioner for which the petitioner is entitled to payment. Due to delay in the matter of execution of the...
Board of Acting Governor of the La Martienere and ors. Vs. National En ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-13-2002
Reported in: 2005(2)CHN207
Asok Kumar Ganguly, J.1. This appeal is from an order dated 14.06.2002, passed by the learned Single Judge on a contested hearing and whereby the learned Single Judge was pleased to reject the injunction order continuing in favour of the petitioners/plaintiffs, the appellants before us.2. The matter has been argued at length and all the papers before the learned Single Judge were included in the stay petition and the same was treated as informal Paper Book. This Court, with the consent of parties, heard both the appeal and the application together.3. The facts which are material for this case are as follows:By a registered deed of lease dated 21.01.1998, the petitioner No. 1 demised in favour of the respondent No. 1 a portion of the premises being 11, Dr. U.N. Brahmachari Street, Kolkata comprising office space Nos. 6, 7 and 7A on the 6th and 7th floor, super-built area of 22,722 sq.ft. of the said premises for an unexpired term of 99 years with the agreement commencing from 01.09.1993...
Prabhas Sarkar Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-12-2002
Reported in: (2003)2CALLT235(HC)
P.K. Biswas, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction passed by Mr. M.M. Sarkar, learned Sessions Judge, Andaman & Nicobar islands, Port Blair, on 26th February, 2002 in Sessions Case No. 1 of 2001 (Sessions Trial No. 17th of December, 2001), whereby he has been pleased to pass an order of conviction upon the appellant, Shri Prabhas Sarkar, sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a further period of three months under Section 20(b)(i) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the 'NDPS Act)).2. The short facts leading to the prosecution of the convict/appellant are as under:-On 5.1.1997 ASI R.A. Prasad was placed in charge of the Hut Bay P.S. in the temporary absence of the Station House Officer of Hut Bay P.S. in Little Andaman. On that dated, being accompanied by HC 1172 D.N. Singh, HC 1166 C.D.P. Yad...
Dr. Kalyan Chaudhuri Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-09-2002
Reported in: (2003)(2)SLJ396CAT
1. The subject matter of this O.A. is the transfer order dated 25.6.02 whereby the applicant has been transferred from Kolkata to Burdwan on the same post.It is averred that the applicant is a member of IRS and since 1976 he has worked in various capacities at various places and has endeavoured to the best of his abilities in the interest of the Department. It is further stated that on 26.6.01 the applicant was posted as Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal XI. This post was subsequently redesignated as Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata XI w.e.f. 1.8.2001. During the financial year 2001-02 the performance of the Department under the applicant's charge was very good in as much as the total collection was Rs. 20.78 crores against the targetted figure of Rs. 23.78 crores. It is further stated that despite the good performance of the applicant, and the D.O. letter dated 15.1.01 issued by the Chairman, Central Board of Direct Taxes he has been transferred. The further case for the app...
Cash Register Co. (P) Ltd. Now Known as Cri Ltd. Vs. Suraj Narayan Sha ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-09-2002
Reported in: (2003)1CALLT148(HC)
N.C. Sil, J.1. This revisional application under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against the judment and order dated 21.3.2002 passed by Shri R.K. Dey, learned Judge, City Civil Court, VIIth Bench in connection with Misc. Case No. 1332 of 2001 arising out of Title Execution Case No. 50 of 2000.2. It appears from the impugned order that as many as three applications were filed by the petitioner/judgment-debtor before the learned lower Court. In one application under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure the petitioner prayed for stay of all further proceedings of Title Execution Case No. 50 of 2000. In other application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code the petitioner prayed for temporary injunction against the O.P.s/ decree-holders and in application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure the petitioner prayed for stay of all proceedings of the said Title Execution Case number. After hearing both the parties the learned Judge rejected all the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »