Kolkata Court August 2003 Judgments
Browse smarter
Turn browsing into brief-ready notes
Open any judgment and get a structured AI Brief in seconds — plus Semantic Search when you need to hunt by meaning, not keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed — log in to pick up where you left off.
Smt. Ushabala Adhikari and anr. Vs. Smt. Manashi Ghosh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-25-2003
Reported in: (2003)3CALLT562(HC)
A.K. Mitra, J.1. This Second appeal has been preferred challenging the judgment and decree dated 4.4.1975 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 4th Court at Alipore in Title Appeal No. 1050 of 1971 affirming the judgment and decree dated 14.10.1974 passed by the learned Munsif, 1st Court, Alipore in Title Suit No. 35 of 1975.2. This appeal originates from suit for injunction. The case as has been made out by the plaintiff is that the plaintiff is the owner of .03 acres of land and the structure thereon which is the suit property. According to the plaintiff, one Nachu Dhali was the owner and he wanted to settle the suit property in tenancy right to Baroda Adhikari who was a neighbour of the said Nachu Dhali. Adhikari took settlement of the same at a rental of Rs. 6.00 per annum and on payment of a premium of Rs. 15.00. The condition was that said Shri Adhikari would pay Rs. 5.00 to the landlord of said Nachu Dhali and Re. 1.00 only to Nachu Dhali. The said Baroda Adhikari was...
Dulal Ranjan Ghosh Dastidar Vs. Rajani Tandon and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)CHN517
Prabir Kumar Samanta, J.1. The plaintiff/respondent filed the suit for eviction of the defendants/ appellants upon contention that they have no legal right to occupy the suit premises. The case of the plaintiff respondent in short is that she purchased the suit flat in a housing complex from one Nandalal Tantia by a registered deed of conveyance dated 28.2.1990. Earlier a suit for eviction was filed by the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiff against the mother of the defendants/ appellants as being a licensee of the said premises. In the said suit the plaintiff/ respondent was not allowed to be added as a party even upon acquisition of interest in the suit flat and as a result of which the suit was dismissed for default. Thereafter, the plaintiff/respondent served a notice to quit upon the defendants for vacating the suit premises and filed the present suit.2. Defendant No. 2 alone contested the suit. The said defendant contended that Nandalal Tantia was not the owner of the suit ...
Food Corporation of India Officers' Association and Anr. Vs. Union of ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-2003
Reported in: (2004)1CALLT378(HC)
Arun Kumar Mitra, J.1. This writ petition was filed by Food Corporation of India Officers' Association as petitioner No. 1 and the President of the said Association as petitioner No. 2. In this writ petition Union of India has been made respondent No. 1, the Managing Director, Food Corporation of India, respondent No. 2 and the Chairman, Food Corporation of India as respondent No. 3. This writ petition was filed in Computer Section, it came up in the list on 26.6.2003 and was taken for hearing as 'Listed Motion' on 4.7.2003 and after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 & 3 this Court passed the following order:--2. This writ petition is moved upon notice to the respondents. The following direction is given for filing of affidavit:3. Affidavit-in-opposition by four weeks from date. Affidavit-in-reply bytwo weeks thereafter and the matter to appear in the list as 'AdjournedMotion' eight weeks hence. The post in question...
Raghunath Dey and Etc. Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ4592
Gorachand De, J.1. These two appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 10th April, 1996 passed by Shri A.K. Bose, Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Howrah in Sessions Trial Case No. XI (7) of 1992 arising out of G. R. Case No. 276 of 1990 and FIR No. 49 dated 9-2-90 of the Police Station-Bally, District -- Howrah. By the said judgment, the ld. Additional Sessions Judge found all the three accused persons, namely, Samir Bose, Santu Das and Raghunath Dey guilty under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code, convicted them thereunder and sentenced each of them to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for life. No separate sentence was passed for payment of fine. Accused Santu Das was also convicted under Section 412 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default, to suffer further Rigorous Imprisonment for six months with a direction that both the substantive sentences against him were to run co...
Khandelwal Surti (Private) Limited and anr. Vs. Assistant Commissioner ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-2003
Reported in: [2004]136STC306(Cal)
Barin Ghosh, J.1. On the assessment made on June 23, 2001 certain sum was found refundable to the petitioner. The Act does not prescribe as to when this refund ought to have been effected. When the assessment was made and it was found that something was refundable to the petitioner, it must be presumed that such refund ought to have had been made available to the petitioner within a reasonable time from the date of such assessment. In the normal circumstances, refund orders are issued along with the assessment orders. In the instant case, however, despite such assessment, the refund was not effected, for it was felt that the amounts so refundable are liable to be adjusted with some other dues of the petitioner. Such adjustment was effected but the petitioner succeeded before the appellate authority while he challenged such adjustment. Thereupon the money due on account of refund has been paid to the petitioner, during the pendency of the writ petition. The short question in the instant...
Kamal Kanta Sahoo Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-19-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)CHN181
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. By this writ application, the writ petitioner, a retired Primary Teacher, has prayed for direction upon the respondents to sanction and pay pension and other benefits on the revised scale of pay as per G. O. No. 33-Edn.(B) dated March 7, 1990. The petitioner also prays for quashing of order dated 16th March, 1992, Annexure 'E', and orders dated May 30, 1991 and 2nd January, 1992 being Annexures 'H' and 'J' respectively to this writ application.2. The following facts are not in dispute:a) The petitioner retired from Panchrol Special Primary School w.e.f. 30th September, 1986 due to his physical incapacity on voluntary basis and the same was accepted by D. S. B., Midnapore, vide Memo No, 4948/2/FS dated August 17, 1988. After such retirement, the petitioner applied to the authority concerned as per G. O. No. 378 Edn.(B) dated 31st July, 1986 praying for his pension and other benefits and those were sanctioned in the year 1990 as would appear from Memo No. 4320/...
Kalpana Biswas Vs. Sukamal Biswas @ Kamal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-18-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)CHN93
Pradip Kumar Biswas, J.1. This is an application under Section 401 readwith Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by one Smt. Kalpana Biswas, petitioner herein seeking to set aside the judgment and order dated 24-6-2002 passed by the Learned Sessions Judge, Nadia in Criminal Motion No. 24 of 2002 arising out of the judgment and order dated 5.12.2001 passedby the learned S.D.J.M., Ranaghat, Nadia in Criminal Misc. Case No. 177 of 2000 and thereby allowing the same in part by setting aside the maintenance in favour of the petitioner against the opposite party a sum of Rs. 800/- per month arid maintaining the order granting maintenance of Rs. 600/- per month for the minor son.2. The short facts leading to the filing of this revisional application are as under.3. The petitioner herein filed an application on 30.12.2000 under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ranaghat, Nadia praying for a maintenance allowance ...
Sri Swapan Kumar Ghosh Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-18-2003
Reported in: (2004)2CALLT473(HC)
I. Banerjee, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner a member of the staff of Saradeswari Kanya Vidyapith, which is hereinafter referred to as the school has prayed for regularisation of his service by appointment to a vacant sanctioned post of Class IV staff in the school.2. The facts pertaining to this writ petition, are briefly as follows.The petitioner has been working as clerk of the school, which is a Government sponsored Girls High School since 1974.3. The petitioner has been serving the institution continuously, without any break since then. According to the petitioner, the petitioner has been signing the attendance register of the school since 1976.4. A vacancy now having arisen in a sanctioned post of clerk of the school, the petitioner claims regularisation of his service by appointment to the said vacant post.5. No directions for affidavits having been sought on behalf of the respondents nor any affidavit-in-opposition having been filed, which could have been done as per...
Sushil Kumar and Co. Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-2003
Reported in: (2004)88ITD35Cal
1. This Special Bench was constituted under Section 255(3) on the recommendation of the Division Bench of the Tribunal for considering the issue as to whether the amount received by the assessee in terms of the consent decree passed by the Small Causes Court is mesne profit and whether it is taxable as a capital receipt or revenue receipt. We have heard the parties and perused the record including the order of the "E" Bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case in I.T.A. Nos. 2690/C/97, 2953/C/94, 1413/C/97, 709-1 l/C/99, 1108/C/99 for assessment years 1990-91 to 1995-96 and 1997-98.2. The relevant facts briefly stated are that the appellant is a partnership firm. The appellant owned certain shares of Shree Nirmal Commercial Ltd. By virtue of its shareholdings, it had acquired the occupancy rights in respect of 21st Floor of 'Nirmal Building' at Mumbai along with car parking space No. 32 in the basement of the building. The appellant had entered into a Leave & Licence agreement i...
Sushil Kumar and Co. Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-2003
Reported in: (2004)267ITR61(Kol.)
1. This Special Bench was constituted under Section 255(3) on the recommendation of the Division Bench of the Tribunal for considering the issue as to whether the amount received by the assessee in terms of the consent decree passed by the Small Causes Court is mesne profit and whether it is taxable as a capital receipt or revenue receipt. We have heard the parties and perused the record including the order of the "E" Bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case in ITA Nos. 2690/C/97, 2953/C/94, 1413/C/97, 1413/C/97, 709-11/C/99 for asst. yrs. 1990-91 to 1995-96 and 1997-98.2. The relevant facts briefly stated are that the appellant is a partnership-firm. The appellant owned certain shares of Shree Nirmal Commercial Ltd. By virtue of its shareholdings, it had acquired the occupancy rights in respect of 21st floor of 'Nirmal Building' at Mumbai along with car parking space No. 32 in the basement of the building. The appellant had entered into a leave & licence agreement in respect ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »