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.
Sri Ranjit Kumar Bagchi Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-18-2005
Reported in: (2005)2CALLT134(HC),2005(4)CHN396
Aloke Chakrabarti, J.1. Petitioner purchased certain plots of lands within the District of Howrah by several deeds in respect of which, name of petitioner has been mutated. Petitioner prayed for conversion of lands from Sali To Factory. All requisites were supplied in support of such prayer as indicated by the concerned authorities. When said prayer for conversion was refused, petitioner approached the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal in O.A. No. 3502 of 2003. Said original application was disposed of by the impugned order on the ground that order passed by the concerned authority refusing conversion is appealable under Section 54 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act and therefore, liberty was granted to the petitioner to prefer appeal against the order impugned.Heard Mr. Ashok Banerjee, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rabilal Maitra, learned Government pleader.2. Main contention of Mr. Banerjee, learned counsel appearing for petitioner is that Section 54 of the ...
Smt. Tapati Ghosh and anr. Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-18-2005
Reported in: (2005)2CALLT275(HC),2005(3)ESC2113
Pratap Kumar Ray, J.1. In this writ application a very short question of law has been raised on the issue whether in terms of Rule 28 Sub-rule (8) of the Rules of Management of Recognised Non-Government Institution (Aided and Unaided) Rules, 1969 hereinafter for brevity referred to as Management Rules of 1969, the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education and/or delegatee of such power as vested to a Committee constituted under Section 24 of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education Act, 1963, has the jurisdiction to provide personal hearing of the delinquent teacher as well as the Administrator and/or Managing Committee of the school including its Headmaster/ Headmistress and/or Teacher-in-Charge as the case may be to consider the proposal for approval to initiate the disciplinary proceeding, which under the statute is called first stage of disciplinary proceeding.2. In the instant case, the writ petitioners who are in administration of the Managing Committee of the school, namely, ...
Sekhar Saha Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-18-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)CHN184
Amit Talukdar, J.1. This application is directed against the order dated 14.6.04 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track 2nd Court, Siliguri in Sessions case No. 46(5)99. The learned Judge by the impugned order refused the prayer of the petitioner for recalling the Investigating Officer (P.W. 18) and for production of the G.D. Entry, in question.2. This has made the petitioner to move this Court against the same.3. Shri Subir Banerjee, learned Counsel appearing in support of the application being assisted by Shri Jayanta Banerjee submitted that the order passed by the learned Fast Track Court requires to be set aside in view of the fact that a valuable right of the defence has been curbed by the Court in refusing on the first instance to allow the prayer for recalling P.W. 18 (Investigating Officer) and on the second instance the prayer for production of General Diary.4. Shri Banerjee has submitted that the General Diary Entry in question which has been sought to be...
Ravi Marketing (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-18-2005
Reported in: (2005)198CTR(Cal)354,[2006]280ITR519(Cal)
D.K. Seth, J.Facts :1. In the present case in respect of the assessment for the year 1988-89, the AO had disallowed the sum of Rs. 9,25,983 out of Rs. 9,37,257.40 claimed by the assessee to have been spent on sales promotion since split up as : (i) conference--Rs. 6,26,538.25 (ii) articles presented--Rs. 2,99,445.49 (iii) sales promotion--Rs. 11,273.55.1.1 The AO held that the expenditure was incurred on entertainment like lodging, food, and presentation of valuable gifts to distributors and guests. The articles presented were gold necklace, gold rings, gold bangles, silver articles and other articles to various distributors along with the lodging and boarding. It had also found that these expenses although were booked under sales -promotion expenses but those were actually in the nature of entertainment.1.2 On the other hand the CIT(A) held that the expenditure was actually incurred in holding conference with the various distributors and agents, a normal practice in this line of busin...
Vip Buildcom P. Ltd. Vs. Everest Kanto Cylinder Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-17-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)CHN159,[2005]124CompCas774(Cal),[2005]64SCL368(Cal)
Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.1. The parties entered into an agreement for supply of industrial gas cylinder. Pursuant to the purchase orders placed from time to time the petitioning creditor supplied cylinders to the company. Supplies were all admitted. Part payments made by the company was also admitted as appears from the statement of account annexed to the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the company. According to the petitioner there had been an outstanding to the extent of Rs. 42,78,831 on account of balance price of the consignment as well as the sales tax amounting to Rs. 62,640 whereas according to the company they were entitled to 15 per cent. discount which would amount to Rs. 47,48,373 and they were entitled to have adjustment of the said sum against the outstanding which would result in refund of a sum of Rs. 4,69,542. The company also claimed damages for non-supply amounting to Rs. 10,50,525.2. Statutory notice of demand although received by the company was not replied.3. The w...
Bhola Das Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-17-2005
Reported in: III(2005)ACC468,2005ACJ1064
P.K. Samanta and Aniruddha Bose, JJ.1. In presence of the learned advocates for the claimant-appellant and the respondent insurance company this appeal is taken up for disposal along with the application filed by the claimant-appellant for amendment of the claim application by enhancing the claimed amount, as the question involved in this appeal is covered by the Division Bench judgment of this court in Suniti Mondal v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., 2005 ACJ 272 (Calcutta).2. The claim case arose out of a motor accident which happened on 20.3.1998 involving the offending vehicle bearing No. MWU 5036 in which the victim girl, named, Shefali Das, succumbed to the injuries suffered in the said accident. The application for compensation was made under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Involvement of the offending vehicle in the said accident was proved before the Claims Tribunal. The claimant-appellant also led evidence to the extent that the victim girl was minor being aged abo...
Rinku Kundu Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-17-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)CHN136
ORDERJayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition is aggrieved by the order of the Sub-Divisional Controller, Food and Supplies, Barrackpore, dated December 20th, 2004 cancelling her licence under West Bengal Kerosene Control Order, 1968.2. After hearing Counsel for the parties, I find that only a short question of law is involved in the writ petition, and that it can be decided on the admitted facts. Hence I propose to finally decide it at the admission stage itself, and for this purpose on agreement of Counsel for the parties, I treat it as an adjourned motion and also on the day's list.3. While the petitioner was working as a dealer within the meaning of West Bengal Kerosene Control Order, 1968, the Controller issued a suspension order against her on November 22nd, 2004. It was issued in exercise of powers conferred on him by para 9 of the Control Order. The petitioner suffered the suspension since certain allegations had been made regarding irregularities in the ...
Soumitra Kr. Jana Vs. Malati Jana and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)CHN206
Pravendu Narayan Sinha, J.1. This revisional application under Section 401 read with Section 462 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as Code) has been preferred by the husband/ petitioner assailing the order dated 28.7.2004 passed by the learned SDJM, Contai in Misc. Case No. 285/2000 under Section 126(2) of the Code dismissing the said application filed by the present petitioner.2. Learned Advocate for the petitioner contended that the opposite party claiming herself as wife filed an application under Section 125 of the Code against this petitioner in 1993 and no notice was served upon him. The petitioner is residing at Calcutta for more than 10 years back. The opposite party/wife obtained an ex parte order under Section 125 of the Code and he came to know about the ex parte order later on sometime in 2000. Thereafter on 19.9.2000 he filed an application under Section 126(2) of the Code before the learned Magistrate along with an application under Section 5 of t...
Ram Swarath Yadav Vs. State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-14-2005
Reported in: 2007(1)CHN289
ORDER REQUIRING PRODUCTION IN COURT OF PERSON INPRISON FOR ANSWERING TO CHARGE OF OFFENCE[See Section 267]ToThe Officer-in-Charge of the Jail at....Whereas the attendance of (name of prisoner) at present confined/detained in the abovementioned prison, is required in this Court to answer to a charge of (state shortly the offence charged) or for the purpose of a proceeding (state shortly the particulars of the proceeding);You are hereby required to produce the said...under safe and sure conduct before this Court...on the day of...of 19...by...a.m. there to answer to the said charge, or for the purpose of the said proceeding and after this Court has dispensed with his further attendance, cause him to be conveyed under safe and sure conduct back to the said person.And you are further required to inform the said...of the contents of this order and deliver to him the attached copy thereof.Dated, this...day of...19.... (signature)(Seal of the Court) Countersigned(Seal) (signature)35. A cursor...
Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (ii) and anr. Vs. Vivekananda Vid ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-13-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)CHN307,[2005(104)FLR1042],(2005)IILLJ721Cal
Dilip Kumar Seth, J.1. The learned Counsel for the appellant produces a copy of the letter showing service upon the respondents along with a receipt of Speed Post. Let the same be taken on record.The question :The only question involved in this case is as to whether the special allowance, in the facts and circumstances of this case, could be treated as part of the basic wages or dearness allowance in the garb of a nomenclature of special allowance subject to the contribution towards Provident Fund under Section 6 of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (1952 Act).The order appealed against:2. The learned Single Judge, relying on a decision in Regional Commissioner, EPF, Tamil Nadu and Pondichery v. Management of Southern Alloy Foundries (P) Ltd., 1982 (1) LLJ 28, was pleased to hold that the special allowance could neither be included in the basic wages nor could it be treated as dearness allowance and, therefore, was pleased to set aside the order passe...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »