Kolkata Court November 2004 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.
Om Prakash Agarwal Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-19-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)CHN184
Debiprasad Sengupta, J.1. Since similar point is involved in all the ten revisional applications, those are taken up analogously for disposal.2. The petitioner has challenged an order dated 28.1.2004 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24-Parganas in Case No. C-2610/2000 under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 thereby allowing the application of the complainant/ opposite party and adding the present petitioner and one Mannalal Chamaria as accused persons in the case.3. For deciding the present applications, it is not necessary to discuss about the factual background of each case. The present proceeding was initiated on the basis of a complaint lodged by one Rupali Sarkar (complainant-O. P. No. 2 herein) alleging that three cheques totalling an amount of Rs. 12,49,000/- were issued by the accused Raj Kumar Chamaria on behalf of the company namely M/s. Heritage Herbs Limited. On being dishonoured by the concerned bank, the complainant sent demand...
Sitala Prasad Jaiswal and ors. Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-19-2004
Reported in: (2005)2CALLT114(HC),2005(4)CHN376
Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay, J.1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the decision/order dated 12th May, 2003 passed by the South Dum Dum Municipality whereby and whereunder the said Municipality refused to sanction the building plan of the petitioner in respect of the Premises Nos. 39, 39A and 39B, Shyam Nagar Road, Kolkata.2. The ground for refusal to sanction the aforesaid building plan of the petitioners as recorded in the impugned decision of the Municipality is that the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer issued a letter on 30th April, 2003 informing the Chairman, South Dum Dum Municipality that there was a mistake in recording the classification of R.S. Plot No. 794 in the Record of Right.3. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that even on the date of the said letter the plot in question was recorded as 'Danga' and not as 'Karkhana' and in the aforesaid letter dated 30th April, 2003 the concerned Block Land and Land Reforms Officer also did not mention th...
Gopal Chandra Ghosh Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-19-2004
Reported in: 2005(3)CHN46
Aniruddha Bose, J.1. The petitioner in the present writ petition applied for stage carriage permit in the route between Bishnupur and Tata via Taldanga, Khatra, Bandwan, Katting and Barabazar etc. The original application in this regard was made on 21.11.1997. In fact, two applications were made one for temporary and one for permanent permit. At that point of time there was no inter-State reciprocal transport agreement in operation between the STA, West Bengal and the State Transport Authority, Jharkhand. Subsequently, in 1988 the petitioner sent a representation to the State Transport Authority, West Bengal for considering grant of stage carriage permit in this route and it appears that another representation was made by the petitioner to the same authority on 19.3.2004 which were endorsed by various public bodies and several people's representatives in the area to be covered by the route proposed. Some people of that area also have made a similar representation around that time. The ...
Sasanka Narayan Chakraborty and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-19-2004
Reported in: 2005(3)CHN505
Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. Fifty-six persons have joined together in this writ petition. They are working as drivers with the designation 'casual bus driver,' on being appointed as such, by the second respondent, Calcutta Tramways Company (1978) Limited.2. The first bundle of undisputed facts is this. The second respondent introduced the bus division, and in course of time acquired a fleet of 300 buses; 192 of them regularly ply on routes. For recruiting drivers it published employment notices to invite applications, tested and interviewed the candidates, prepared select lists, got the selected candidates medically examined, and finally appointed the successful ones without any formal appointment letters. From the very inception the drivers were appointed with the designation 'casual bus driver'. Through same processes and with same designation, the petitioners were appointed during the period from December 23rd, 1994 to September 11th, 2001.3. The further undisputed facts, which I tre...
Shyamal Prosad Halder Vs. Madhuri Halder and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-19-2004
Reported in: 2005(3)CHN531
Arunava Barua, J.1. This revisional application under Section 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 5th Court, Barasat, in Criminal Revision Case No. 556 of 2000.2. The matter relates to a maintenance proceeding by the wife against the husband. The husband has filed the instant revisional application being aggrieved by the said order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 5th Court, Barasat in Criminal Revision Case No. 556 of 2000 dated 19.6.2002.3. The material point for consideration is whether the alteration of maintenance allowance or enhancement of the same can be made by the Court when the case under Section 125 Cr. PC by the wife against the husband is disposed of on compromise on certain terms including maintenance and regular payment of enhanced maintenance for year to year if the circumstances so demanded.4. It has been argued on behalf of the applicant husband that Section 127 of the Code of Crimin...
State of West Bengal Vs. Amit Kumar Gupta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-18-2004
Reported in: (2005)1CALLT494(HC),2005(1)CHN199
Amitava Lala, J.1. This is an application for cancellation of bail. The case was made under Section 395/397 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25(1B)(a)/27 of the Arms Act. From the order impugned granting bail we find that following the ratio of 2002 Cr. LJ 2507, Sunil Kumar v. State of Jharkhand, the learned Chief Judge-in-Charge, City Sessions Court, Calcutta granted bail to the petitioner therein when found that the accused was in custody for more than 60 days. By making this application the State contended that the order is suffering from misconception of law. Both the parties made submissions on the earlier judgment reported in 2002 Cr. LJ 2507 and also other judgments cited hereunder. The Single Judge of Jharkhand High Court observed that the sentence for offence under Section 304B IPC may extend to life, but it cannot be an imprisonment for life. Further though the minimum sentence may not be less than 7 years but it cannot be equated with those offences for which minimum sen...
Baranagar Jute Factory Plc Vs. Laxmi Narayan Taparia
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-18-2004
Reported in: [2006]133CompCas115(Cal),[2005]64SCL220(Cal)
Altamas Kabir, J.1. On a petition filed by the Shreckishan Omprakash being Company Petition No. 2 of 1987, the learned Company Judge by his order dated 28th October, 1987, directed the Baranagar, Jute Factory, Plc. to be wound up and the Official Liquidator was directed to take possession of the company and its assets. Subsequent to the passing of the said order, one Raj kumar Nemani filed an application under Sections 466 and 557 of the Companies Act, 1956, for staying the winding up proceedings permanently and for constitution of a Committee of Management with the persons mentioned in the Scheme for revival of the Company in liquidation. An order was passed on the said application by the learned Company Judge on 15th September, 1988, appointing an ad hoc Committee of Management for the purpose of reopening the jute mill and to run the same in terms of the said Scheme. The Official Liquidator was directed to continue in possession of the mill but was also directed not to interfere wit...
Sri Arun Kumar Bagla Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-17-2004
Reported in: (2005)93ITD110(Kol.)
1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of CIT (A) Central, II, Kolkata upholding the order Under Section 154/158BC(c) of the I.T. Act.2. In this case a search Under Section 132 of the Act was conducted on 11^th March 1997. Thereafter by a notice dated 7.11.1997 issued Under Section 158BC(1) the A.O. directed the assessee to file return for the block period. This notice was served on the assessee on 11.11.97 & the assessee was required to file the return within 16 days from the date of service. Accordingly the block return was due for filing on 27.11.97. The assessee, however, filed his block return on 30^th July 1998 declaring undisclosed income of Rs. 88,00,000/-. The tax payable Under Section 113 thereon was Rs. 52,80,000/-. The block assessment Under Section 158BC(c) of the I.T. Act was thereafter passed on 24^th May 1999 assessing undisclosed income of Rs. 90,65,130/- and tax payable thereon was determined at Rs. 54,39,078/-. After giving credit to the taxes...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›