Kolkata Court January 2005 Judgments
Arup Singha Ray Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-2005
Reported in: (2005)2CALLT397(HC),II(2005)DMC647
Pranab Kumar Deb, J.1. The death reference being 1 of 2003 was made following the conviction and sentence of Arup Singha Roy in connection with Sessions Trial No. 40 of 2002.The appellant Arup Singha Roy also preferred an appeal being 313 of 2003 against the conviction and sentence under Section 302 Indian Penal Code. The death reference and the criminal appeal have been heard and disposed of together.2. A specific case under Sections 498A/304B and 302 Indian Penal Code was registered following the shocking murder of a housewife and her baby. The case of the prosecution, as emerged from the First Information Report and unfurled during the trial, may be summed up as follows :-3. The marriage of the appellant Arup Singha Roy with Urmila Ghosh was solemnised in the early part of 1997. A sum of Rupees fourteen thousand was paid to Arup Singha Roy by way of dowry in terms of the demand so made by the bridegroom. Initially, the couple led a happy conjugal life. The situation underwent a chan...
Tag this Judgment!Andaman and Nicobar Islands Forest and Plantation Development Corpn. L ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-2005
Reported in: (2005)198CTR(Cal)76,[2006]280ITR118(Cal)
D.K. Seth, J.The controversy:1. The deduction under Sections 32A, 80HH and 80J of the IT Act, 1961 relevant to asst. yrs. 1983-84 and 1985-86 is in controversy before us.The Department's submission:2. Mr. S.N. Dutta, learned counsel for the Department, had pointed out that the learned Tribunal and the AO were right in holding that the business of the assessee did not qualify for the deduction under the said three sections. Since conversion of trees into logs does not change the nature and character of the tree and when it is converted into logs, it retains the same characteristics of wood and as such it does not amount to production, particularly, when no new commodity emerges out of such activity.Submission of the assessee/appellant:3. Mr. R.N. Dutta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee, on the other hand, contends that a tree when felled is not a commercially saleable article but when it is de-embarked and cut into pieces and logs are produced by seasoning the same, i...
Tag this Judgment!Bishu Mondal Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)CHN325
Alok Kumar Basu, J.1. The Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Berhampur in the district of Murshidabad while disposing of the Sessions Trial No. 237 of 2002 convicted Bishu Mondal under Sections 302/34 and 376(2)(G) of the Indian Penal Code and finally, passed an order of death sentence against said Bishu Mondal which gave rise to Death Reference Case No. 1 of 2004 since under the provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure, death sentence recorded by a Judge is subject to confirmation by this Court. Bishu Mondal also preferred an appeal against his order of conviction and sentence registered as Criminal Appeal No. 287 of 2004.2. By our present order we propose to dispose of both the death reference as well as criminal appeal preferred by the convict appellant.3. The Sessions Trial No. 237 of 2002 arose out of a written complaint lodged by Jannat Ali Mondal of village Mominpur under P.S. Domcal in the district of Murshidabad. Jannat Ali Mondal lodged the FIR on 2nd March, 1997 conten...
Tag this Judgment!Shantilata Paul Vs. Swapan Kumar Paul and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)CHN729
Sailendra Prasad Talukdar, J. 1. This is directed against order dated 27th February, 2003 passed by the learned District Judge, Howrah in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 77 of 2002 arising out of Order No. 38 dated 4th March, 2002 passed by the learned Civil Judge, (Junior Division), 2nd Court, Howrah in connection with Title Suit No. 90 of 2001.2. Grievances of the petitioner/plaintiff may briefly be stated as follows:The petitioner/plaintiff is the mother of the defendant/O.P.No. 1 and the proforma opposite parties. Petitioner's husband was the 'karta' of the Dayabhaga Hindu family comprising of himself, the petitioner and the opposite parties as well as one Bhabatosh Das Gupta, since deceased. Petitioner's family in order to purchase the land comprising in the suit property being Municipal premises No. 709/1, Sarat Chatterjee Road, P.S. Shibpur, Howrah, approached the Shibpur Co-operative bank as O.P. No. 1 was an employee of the said Bank since 1981 and the said Bhabatosh Das Gupta was an...
Tag this Judgment!Bidhu Bhusan Chandra Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-28-2005
Reported in: (2006)1CALLT591(HC)
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. By this application the petitioner being the retired Headmaster of Anandapur Higher Secondary School (hereinafter referred to as the said School) has prayed for compensation for loss and damages suffered by him because of fighting and/or initiating litigations in this Hon'ble Court and for illegal and mala fide action and persistent and flagrant violations of the orders of this Hon'ble Court, and for release of a sum of Rs. 24,417/- on account of gratuity, commuted amount of pension and for release of the backlog salaries lying outstanding in piecement in accordance with the order and/or memo dated 12th November, 1980 of West Bengal Board of Higher Secondary Education (hereinafter in short Board) the Memo No. 1239/S dated 24th January, 1981, the petitioner has subsequently filed a supplementary affidavit summarized his claim as follows:a) Salary for 42 days in 1968 : Rs. 1693b) Salary for the period commencing from 15th January, 1970 -31st March, 1970 : Rs. ...
Tag this Judgment!J. Thomas and Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-27-2005
Reported in: (2005)195CTR(Cal)230,[2005]275ITR467(Cal)
ORDERD.K. Seth, J.1. The questions :This appeal was admitted on the following two grounds :'(a) Whether, for computing the profits in terms of Section 32AB(3) of the Act, the income by way of dividends, interest on securities, property income, which is treated as business income under the provisions of Parts II and III of Schedule VI to the Companies Act, 1956, is to be excluded and deduction under the said section is not to be allowed with reference thereto ?(b) Whether the petitioner can be considered as a trading company within the meaning of the Finance Act, 1989, and Finance Act, 1990 ?'1.1. These appeals arise out of a common judgment of the learned Tribunal covering five assessment years between 1989-90 to 1993-94 comprising of five appeals. The deficit Court fees have since been paid.1.2. For the sake of convenience, we may answer the second question first.The second question : Assessee : Whether a non-trading company:2. So far as the second point is concerned, which we were su...
Tag this Judgment!W.B. Minimum Wages Inspectors Association and ors. Vs. State of West B ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-27-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)CHN404,2005(3)ESC1905
ORDER15. In these circumstances, the appeal succeeds. The writ petition is allowed. The order of the learned Single Judge under appeal is hereby set aside. The petitioners be given the same scale from the respective date as were given to their counterparts, namely, the four posts mentioned at page 42 of the paper book under R.O.P.A. 1981 as well as the corresponding scale under R.O.P.A. 1986 and the same scale that would be given to those four posts mentioned in page 42 of the paper book under the Fourth Pay Commission; and accordingly their pay be fixed and the difference/arrears be paid to the petitioners within six months from the date of service of a certified copy of this order, and be paid accordingly so far as their current salary is concerned in the same scale together with all consequential benefits as are available in law to the respective petitioners.15.1. The appeal, thus, stands allowed. There will, however, be no order as to costs.15.2. Urgent xerox certified copy, if app...
Tag this Judgment!Santimay Chaudhuri Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-27-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ESC1935
Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition has two fold grievances:--(1) the respondents wrongfully refused to accept his application for voluntary retirement; and (2) they initiated two disciplinary proceeding mala fide, and for frustrating his legal right to go on voluntary retirement.2. In August 2002 he was working in Kolkata office of Indian Airlines Ltd. as senior manager. The company wanted to utilise his service in Chennai, and hence transferred him by order dated 26th August, 2002. Feeling aggrieved, he moved this Court by filing a Writ Petition [No. 12950 (W) of 2002]. By order dated 9th September, 2002 it was disposed off with the observations that he must join the Chennai office though he would be at liberty to make representation to his employer expressing his difficulties in complying with the transfer order. Consequently, he joined the Chennai office on 16th September, 2002 and discharge duties till 29th September, 2002.3. He applied for leave statin...
Tag this Judgment!Dharmsila Roy Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-27-2005
Reported in: 2006(4)CHN338
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. All these appeals were heard analogously as those are interlinked and identical questions are involved. F. A. No. 197 of 2002 has been preferred against the judgment dated 24th March, 1993 passed by the learned L. A. Judge. Alipore in L.R.A. Case No. 225 of 1992 (V). The other seven appeals being F. A. Nos. 210-215 of 2002 and F.A. No. 63 of 1998 were filed against two different judgments dated February 20, 1997 and February 24, 1997 delivered in different L.R.A. cases heard analogously and disposed of by the aforesaid two common judgments passed by the Additional Special Land Acquisition Judge, 1st Court, Alipore. Particulars of the adquired lands are given below.CaseNo. AcquiredPlots Nature Area MouzaSheetNo. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6 L.R.A.235 of 1992 (V) 3720/38 28 Sali0.5132acres cottahs -31.179 Kasba9 F.A.197 of 2002 3808/38 47 Bank ofTank 0.04acre -2.42 cottahsKasba9 L.R.A.G of 1996 (V)FA 211of 2002 3808/38 47 Bank ofTank 0.04acre -2.42 cottahsKasba9 L. R.A. 11...
Tag this Judgment!Anil Kumar Gayen Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)CHN298
Pravendu Narayan Sinha, J. 1. This revisional application has been preferred by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short Code), 1973 for quashing the criminal proceeding being G.R. Case No. 685/95 pending before the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (in short SDJM), Contai arising out of Ramnagar P.S. Case No. 97 dated 18.8.95 under Sections 409/406/420 of the Indian Penal Code (in short IPC) and chargesheet bearing No. 94/97 dated 15.12.1997.2. The facts of the case is that the First Information Report (in short FIR) was lodged by the Secretary of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education before the Officer-in-Charge, Ramnagar Police Station alleging that the accused Anil Kumar Gayen was entrusted with examination of 302 English answer scripts of Madhyamik Examination, 1995. The complainant received certain documents which are xerox copy of anonymous letters in Bengali written to one Tapasi Karan bearing Roll 2792 No. 0041 along with xer...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »