Kolkata Court January 2005 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.
Niranjan Sahu Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-25-2005
Reported in: (2006)1CALLT62(HC)
Maharaj Sinha, J.1. This, as far as I have been able togather, is the 5th writ petition in this Court initiated by the writ petitioner herein, Dr. Niranjan Sahu, before this writ petition four more writ petitions were moved by Dr. Sahu and orderes were passed in those writ applications both by the hon'ble single Judge and the Hon'ble Division Bench and at the very outset I must say that those orders can safely be said to have been in favour of the writ petitioner herein, I shall mention briefly what orders were, in fact, made in the past four writ applications by this Court as I proceed to consider the merit or merits of the present writ application.2. Although the petitioner has essentially challenged an order of prolonged suspension against the petitioner in this writ application but the petitioner has also sought for an order quashing the resolution of of the Managing Committee of Futigoda High School, at Futigoda, in the District of 24-Parganas(South), to proceed against the petiti...
Chem Crown Exports Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-24-2005
Reported in: (2005)93TTJ(Kol.)710
1.These three appeals by the assessee for the asst. yrs. 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98 are directed against the orders of the CIT(A).These are being disposed of with this consolidated order.2. The main issue in these appeals is regarding the validity of the reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Act. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Act in this case for all the three assessment years are bad in law. He argued that the reopening is based only on change of opinion and there is no subsequent information with the Department to reopen the completed assessments. He argued that the assessments for the asst. yrs. 1995-96 and 1996-97 were, originally framed in scrutiny case under Section 143(3) of the Act wherein after due consideration, the AO allowed the claim of the assessee under Sections 80-I and 80HH of the Act. He argued that the notice of reassessment under Section 147 for the asst. yr. 1995-96 is dt. 25...
Smt. Gita Dutta Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-24-2005
Reported in: (2005)195CTR(Cal)37,[2005]275ITR12(Cal)
ORDERD.K. Seth, J.1. This appeal is against a block assessment comprising ten previous years. The Stamp Reporter had notified deficiency in payment of Court fees.2. Mr. J.P. Khaitan, learned advocate for the appellant, submits that a block assessment is an exception to, and distinct and, different from, a regular assessment as is apparent from reading of Section 158BA, Explanation and 158BB of the IT Act, 1961. It is an independent assessment over and above the regular assessment covering a block period which gives rise to one cause of action though comprises of several years of assessment.3. After having heard Mr. Khaitan and perusing the provisions contained in Sections 158B, 158BA and 158BB of 1961 Act, it appears that in terms of Clause (a) of Section 158B, block period comprises of previous years relevant to ten assessment years preceding the previous year in which the search was conducted as it stood prior to its amendment effective from 1st of June, 2001. This was explained in S...
NavIn Jhunjhunwala Vs. Vijay Kumar Sharma
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-20-2005
Reported in: (2005)1CALLT511(HC)
Narayan Chandra Sil, J.1. This is to consider an application being G.A. No. 2284 of 2004 arising out of Insolvency Case No. 7 of 2003 filed by the debtor-insolvent Navin Jhunjhunwala.2. It is stated in the petition that the amount of dues was to the extent of Rs. 62,017/- payable by the petitioner/debtor to the creditor as on 31.3.2003 which was confirmed by the petitioner/debtor, The dues was confirmed by the petitioner on a number of occasions. In such circumstances, the Court by its order dated 10.9.2003 allowed the insolvency case declaring the petitioner insolvent. It is claimed that in terms of the provisions of Section 18 of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909, the Court may at any time after making of an order of adjudication stay any suit or other proceedings against the insolvent before any Judge or Judges of the Court or any other Court subject to the superintendence of the Court. It is also mentioned that the Official Assignee in pursuance of the order of adjudication...
Technochem (India) Vs. Gouri Shankar Investment Private Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-20-2005
Reported in: (2005)2CALLT166(HC)
ORDERNarayan Chandra Sil, J.1. This is to consider a prayer as to whether there is necessity for hearing the Issue No. 2 as a preliminary issue. I have heard the learned advocates for both the parties and in course of their submissions on the necessity for hearing of Issue No. 2 very often the learned advocates for both the parties overlapped and entered into the merits of hearing of the Issue No. 2 itself. Sometimes, from the record and the subsequent order sheets also it appears as if the matter resting for hearing the Issue No. 2. But the order dated 10.9.2004 is conspicuous enough to suggest that the necessity for hearing of Issue No. 2 is fixed and the matter for consideration not to dispose of Issue No. 2 itself.Issue No. 2 reads as under:'Is the plaintiff debarred from filing the suit under the provisions of Bengal Money Lenders Act, 1940 as alleged in paragraph 16 of the written statement?'2. Mr. Dutt appearing along with Mr. Ranjan Kr. Bachwat submitted on behalf of the plaint...
Nawal Kishore Agarwalla Vs. Haryana State Electricity Board
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-20-2005
Reported in: (2005)2CALLT477(HC)
Narayan Chandra Sil, J.1. This is a suit for declaration for Rs. 70,629.17 P. or in the alternative an enquiry into the loss and damages suffered by the plaintiff and decree for such sum as may be found due to the plaintiff.2. The plaint case in brief is that by exchange of correspondence between the parties the plaintiff agreed to sell and the defendant agreed to purchase 95 Kms. Of Galvanised Steel Stranded Wire having 7/3.15 mm. Steel Strands of Grade 3 as per ISS-2141/1968 of minimum tensile strength 110 K.G.f./mm @ Rs. 2,510/- per Km. upon several conditions as incorporated in the plaint. The contract was concluded which will be evident by several letters referred in paragraph 2 of the plaint. By a telegram of November 3, 1972 as confirmed subsequently by Memo No. 14856/T-331/III dated November 6, 1972 addressed to the plaintiff at its office at Calcutta within the jurisdiction of this Court the defendant purportedly terminated the said contract uniteraly, arbitrarily and without ...
Pampa Das Vs. Sanjib Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-19-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Cal266,(2005)2CALLT72(HC),2005(2)CHN17,II(2005)DMC254
Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, J.1. In this revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India Order No. 18 dated May 17, 2004 passed by Mr. A.K. Das, learned Judge, Family Court, Calcutta in Matrimonial Suit No. 65 of 2003 has been impugned.2. By the order impugned the learned Judge rejected an application for maintenance pendente life and expenses of proceedings filed by the wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, inter alia, with the findings that the wife left her matrimonial home at her own Will and without any sufficient reason and as she had made complaints to the police, she was not entitled to maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.3. The moot point involved in this application is that whether for the purpose of awarding maintenance pendente lite and expenses of the proceedings the conduct of the applicant is relevant?4. In order to appreciate the aforesaid point it is necessary to recapitulate the provisions of Sections 24 and ...
Sankar Dastidar Vs. Smt. Banjula Dastidar and anr. Overruled
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-19-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Cal121,(2005)2CALLT360(HC),2005(2)CHN387
D.K. Seth, J.1. A very interesting point on the question of maintainability of the suit, emanating from a counter-claim pleaded in the written statement and out of an order dated 6th September 1994 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in CO No. 1637 of 1993, was dealt with by the learned Court below conceivably in a cryptic manner without any reasoning to support the ultimate finding on the face of the questions raised.The questions :2. The questions that are to be decided in this case principally are twofold. First whether the suit was barred by limitation and second whether the suit was barred by res judicata. Apart from the maintainability of the suit, the merit was also challenged. My learned brother Sinha, J. has dealt with the merit with which I do concur.2.1 So far as the question of maintainability is concerned, the point of limitation has two aspects, one that the counter-claim was filed after the expiry of limitation and that the suit was registered on 14th of March 199...
Rabindra Nath Chakraborty Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-19-2005
Reported in: (2005)2CALLT35(HC)
Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.1. The petitioner was a probationer in the Great Eastern Hotel, a State Government Undertaking. The writ petitioner, while on probation, was asked to show cause on several irregularities pointed out by the authority. He was ultimately removed from service. He came up by way of writ proceeding. This Court by an order dated September 11, 2001 quashed the order of removal from service on the ground that even if the was a probationer, once charge was inflicted upon him, it was incumbent upon the authority to conduct a regular disciplinary proceeding by giving him reasonable opportunity of hearing. The authority thereafter gave personal hearing to the writ petitioner and passed a reasoned order of removal from service.2. The learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner, has assailed the order of removal on three counts--(i) No copy of the enquiry report was ever given to the petitioner;(ii) Since the disciplinary authority discharged with the finding of the Enquiry ...
Abul HossaIn @ Baga Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-19-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)CHN211
Alok Kumar Basu, J.1. Convict appellant Abul Hossain @ Baga has preferred this appeal from jail, challenging his order of conviction and sentence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jangipur in the district of Murshidabad in connection with Sessions Trial Case No. 12 of 1998.2. The prosecution case arose out of an FIR lodged by one Raisuddin Ahmed on 12th February, 1996 alleging death of his daughter Mabrura Khatun. It was the case of Raisuddin Ahmed that on 12th February, 1996 when his said daughter was returning from her college riding on a bicycle and reached near the house of one Mustakin Sk. near Suti Link Road of Raghunathpur, the appellant driving a matador van bearing No. W.B.-57-0515 in a most rash and negligent manner knocked down said Mabrura Khatun resulting her instantaneous death on the spot.3. On the basis of said FIR of Raisuddin Ahmed, Suti Police Station started a case under Section 279/304A of the IPC and S.I....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »