Kolkata Court November 2007 Judgments

Bangur Land Devlopment Corportion Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal and or ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2008(1)CHN618

Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.1. The appellant was a company incorporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1913. It was dealing with business of land development. In 1976 the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act came in force and under the provisions of the said Act of 1976 the owner was to submit return of the excess land beyond the ceiling limit fixed under the said Act of 1976. Accordingly, the appellant submitted return. They also prayed for retention of surplus land in accordance with the provisions of the said Act of 1976. The authority under the said Act of 1976 rejected the application of the appellant and passed an order of vesting in respect of the excess land. The order of the competent authority rejecting the application of the appellant became the subject-matter of the writ proceeding. In the writ proceeding the appellant challenged the order of rejection, as according to them, they were entitled to an order of retention as prayed for in their application mad...

industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India Ltd. (icici) Vs. ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: [2008]144CompCas403(Cal),[2009]89SCL55(Cal)

Sanjib Banerjee, J.1. The appellant seeks to have its charge in respect of the immovable properties of the company in liquidation recorded in the records maintained by the Registrar of Companies. The appellant applied before the Company Law Board under Section 141 of the Companies Act, 1956 and is here assailing the order of dismissal Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India Ltd. v. Official Liquidator, Usha Automobiles and Engineering Co. Ltd. (in liquidation) [2000] 100 Comp Cas 150 (CLB) thereof. The Company Law Board exercises the Central Government's powers under Section 141 of the Act. The two questions of law that have been raised in this appeal limited to legal issues are, as to whether belated registration of a charge can be permitted in respect of any asset of a company which has been directed to be wound up, and, whether a charge comes to be created only upon the formal execution of a document and not on the company's undertaking to the creditor to create a char...

Ranabir Saha Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2008(1)CHN746,[2008(116)FLR529]

Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay, J.1. The appellant herein filed a writ petition being aggrieved by the initiation of the disciplinary proceeding on the basis of the chargesheet issued by the concerned authority after lapse of 22 years from the date of commission of the alleged misconduct.2. The learned Single Judge dismissed the aforesaid writ petition by the judgement and order dated 20th September, 2004 upon rejecting all the arguments made on behalf of the appellant herein.3. It has been urged on behalf of the appellant that the disciplinary proceeding initiated against the said appellant cannot be sustained in the eye of law on the ground of delay alone. Various points were raised before the learned Single Judge while challenging the validity and/or legality of the disciplinary proceeding initiated against the appellant herein, but the learned Senior Counsel representing the said appellant while assailing the judgement and order under appeal confined his arguments only on the ground th...

Bistupada Das Vs. State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2008)2CALLT16(HC),[2008(119)FLR673]

Tapen Sen, J.1. The Petitioner prays for quashing of the Order dated 10.8.2005, as contained in annexure P-14, whereby and whereunder, the Disciplinary Authority imposed the punishment of dismissal from service upon the petitioner with a further order that the entire period of suspension would be treated as such (period of suspension) and that nothing would be payable to him towards salary, allowances and consequential benefits, including annual increments, save and except the subsistence allowance already paid to him. The petitioner also prays for quashing the Order dated 18.10.2005, as contained in annexure P-16, whereby and whereunder, the Appellate Authority, dismissed the Appeal of the Petitioner, thereby upholding the Order of punishment of 'dismissal from service without notice' imposed upon him by the Disciplinary Authority.2. The facts of this case are that while working as a Peon in the Service Branch of the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, situated on 14, N.S. Road, Kolkata...

Board of Trustees for the Port of Calcutta Vs. Batliboi and Co. Limite ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2008(3)CHN799

Sanjib Banerjee, J.1. The basis of the award covered by the Arbitration Act, 1940, passed by a retired engineer is assailed primarily on the ground of the mental capacity of the arbitrator. The contract related to the construction to the manufacture, supply, installation and commissioning of a dust control system at the coal handling plant of the respondent at the Haldia dock complex. The reference ran into 102 sittings and the controversy that the petitioner refers to arose at and immediately after the 101st sitting.2. The minutes of the 101st sitting record that representatives of the respondent in the reference (the petitioner herein) were present before the arbitrator at 5.10 p.m. and a representative of the claimant arrived shortly thereafter but Counsel for the claimant did not appear till 5.55 p.m. by which time Counsel for the respondent in the reference had already left. The minutes thereafter record that the respondent in the reference had sought leave to deal with the argume...

Md. Abdus Samad Fakir Vs. State of W.B. and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2008(2)CHN854

Debasish Kar Gupta, J.1. The subject-matter of challenge in this writ application is the order of suspension passed by the respondent No. 5 under his Memo No. 675/SC/FS/DH/07 dated August 2, 2007 in respect of the MR Distributorship of the petitioner situated at village, P.O. & P.S. Mograhat, Dist. South 24-Parganas. The petitioner further prays for quashing the proceeding initiated against his MR Distributorship on the basis of the show-cause notice dated September 30, 2007.2. Since a point of law is to be decided in this writ application on the basis of the admitted facts and circumstances, this writ application is taken up for final disposal with the consent of the parties.3. The fact of the case in a nutshell is this, a show-cause-notice dated July 30, 2007 was issued to the petitioner by the respondents in connection with the above MR Distributorship of the petitioner. The petitioner submitted his reply dated July 31, 2007 to the above show-cause-notice. Thereafter, the impugned o...

Sajal Kumar Ganguly and ors. Vs. Deba Prasad Mitra and anr.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2008(1)CHN962

Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J.1. Affidavits filed by the respective parties be kept with the record.2. This revisional application is directed against an order being No. 108 dated 5.1.2007 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, 1st Court at Barasat in Money Suit No. 8 of 1997.3. To resolve the dispute regarding the genuineness of signature of the defendant No. 1 appearing in Ext. 1, the defendant No. 1 applied for appointment of a handwriting expert for comparison of the disputed signature appearing in Ext. 1 with his admitted signature appearing in Ext. 6 so that expert can submit his report about the genuineness of the disputed signature of the defendant No. 1 in the said document.4. The said application having been rejected by the learned Trial Judge, the defendant No. 1/petitioner filed a revisional application being C.O. No. 2437 of 2004 which was disposed of by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 22.3.2005 whereby the learned Trial Judge was directed to appoint a han...

Namita Pramanick Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2008)1CALLT217(HC),[2008(117)FLR849]

Biswanath Somadder, J.1. Affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioner be kept on record.2. Heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the parties.3. After considering the submissions made by the learned advocates and upon perusing the writ petition I am of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of without calling for affidavits since there is essentially no disputed question of fact. Thus I dispose of the writ petition with the following order:4. The writ petitioner, it appears, is a widow of a former Assistant Teacher of a Primary School under Khalna Circle in the district of Howrah. From the writ petition it appears that the said Primary School teacher died on 7th June, 2004 at the age of 48 after being afflicted with kidney ailment following high diabetes. The widow being the writ petitioner herein, has also stated in the writ petition that during the life time of her husband a considerable amount of money was spend for his treatment and ultimately he d...

Cit Vs. Ispat Industries Ltd.

Court: Kolkata

1. We have perused the application filed for condonation of delay. We are satisfied with the grounds mentioned therein. Hence delay is condoned and the application being GA No. 2819 of 2007 is allowed.2. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. We have also perused the order passed by the learned Tribunal. The question arose whether the deletion as made by the Commissioner (Appeal) is correct in the facts and circumstances of the case. All the questions which were raised before the Tribunal were duly dealt with by the learned Tribunal extensively and the reasons were given by the learned Tribunal after taking into consideration the decision' of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT (2002) 295 ITR 273. The learned Tribunal also relied upon the said decision in particular with regard to computation of book profit for the purpose of Section 115J and the following observation has been made:The assessing officer, while computing the book profits of a company under Section...

West Bengal School Service Commission and anr. Vs. Shelly Jaffri Latif ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2008(1)CHN801

Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.1. The respondent No. 1 sat for the School Service Commission Examination for the post of assistant teacher in English in 2001. She was successful and she was placed at serial No. 75 in respect of female vacancies. She was ultimately recommended in Raghunathpur Girls High School in Basirhat in the district of 24-Parganas North. She did not join there on the ground that the school was distant from her residence at Calcutta. She approached the Commission for change of placement. The Commission did not act upon such request. Being aggrieved she approached the learned Single Judge by filing a writ petition inter alia, praying for issue of writ of mandamus directing the Commission to recommend her in any school at Park Circus, Ballygunge, Taltala or Sealdah in Calcutta, so that she could join her new posting after such alteration. It was contended that she was having two minor children and ailing husband suffering from pancreatitis.2. The learned Judge allowed the wr...