Kolkata Court April 2008 Judgments

Amit Kumar Pugalia Vs. Tezpore Tea Company Limited

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2008(4)CHN120

Ashim Kumar Roy, J.1. In connection with a proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act relating to Case No. C-11904 of 2005, now pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 16th Court, Calcutta, the petitioner after being released on bail, on the very next day made an application under Section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for his exemption from personal appearance during the day-to-day proceedings of the said case. It is the case of the petitioner that he is a permanent resident of Delhi and if he is required to be present on each day of hearing of the matter the same shall cause tremendous hardship to him. However, the learned Magistrate refused to consider his such prayer and directed that the same shall be considered in his presence. Hence, this Criminal Revision.2. Heard the learned Advocate, appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as the learned Advocate, appearing on behalf of the opposite party.3. Having gone through the impugned order, ...

Development Consultants Pvt. Vs. Dcit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata

Reported in: (2008)115TTJ(Kol.)577

1. The above two appeals are filed by the assessee having been aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A)-XL, Kolkata dated 12.12.2007 relating to assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05 respectively in the case of the assessee.2. Since the issues involved in these appeals are identical we have decided the same by this common consolidated order for the sake of convenience.3. We first take up the ITA NO.79/Kol/2008 wherein the assessee has raised the following grounds: 1. For that on the fact and in the circumstances the ld. CIT(A) was wrong in sustaining addition under Section 43B and Section 36(i)(v)(a) of the Act on account of Provident Fund contribution towards. Aggregating to Rs. 1,29,13,290 together with arithmetical mistake in disallowance to the extent of Rs. 4,08,181 and thereby total disallowance sustained was Rs. 1,33,21,471/-(Rs. 1,29,13,290 + 4,08,181). 2. For that on the fact and circumstances the ld. CIT(A) wrongly and arbitrarily disallowed payment of Rs,67,77.210/- to the a...

Md. Nazrul Islam Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Kolkata

S.P. Talukdar, J.1. Admittedly, the petitioner joined the Border Security Force (in short, BSF) as a Constable on 6th January, 1973. He was promoted to the rank of Sub-Inspector on 26th April, 1982. He became Inspector on 10th April, 1993 and thereafter, was promoted to the rank of Assistant Commandant on 22nd July, 2004. Since June, 2004, his son, as a patient of Dilated Cardio Myopathy, was under treatment of Christian Medical College & Hospital, Vellore. He is at present under treatment of Burdwan Medical College & Hospital and also B.S.F. Hospital at Digberia. After examination by the Medical Board constituted by the Principal of Burdwan Medical College & Hospital, he was found to be physically handicapped due to the said ailment. The petitioner is the only bread earner of the family and is at present burdened with such handicapped son. While posted as a Company Commander under 106 Battalion NDRF, respondent No. 5 initiated a disciplinary proceeding against him by issuing charge sh...

Chandan Thakur Vs. Iisco Steel Plant and ors.

Court: Kolkata

S.P. Talukdar, J.1. Grievance of the writ petitioner as ventilated in the application relates to alleged wrong recording of his age/date of birth in the service record and respondent authority's refusal to rectify the same. The backdrop of the case may briefly be stated as follows:The petitioner was working as a Khalasi P. No. 11603 in Traffic Iron Department of IISCO Steel Plant, Burnpur as a contractor labour of respondent No. 6 under principal employer, IISCO Steel Plant since 1st May, 1991.2. Age of the petitioner was recorded as per estimation of the contractor as about 49 years. The respondent No. 6 after awarding a contract for a period of one year by letter dated 18.11.2006 approached the Concerned authority for renewal of photo gate pass of 27 workers i.e., for those who were working under him. The respondent No. 6 also sent a chart of workers in which the name, father's name, address and age of the workers were given. Name of the petitioner was there as against serial No. 17....

Food Corporation of India and ors. Vs. Utpal Chowdhury

Court: Kolkata

Sadhan Kumar Gupta, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court on 5/3/2007 in W.P. No. 12261 (W) of 2005. 2. It is the case of the appellants that the writ petitioner filed the said writ before the ld. Single Judge challenging the order of rejection of the prayer for Voluntary Retirement Scheme (hereinafter referred to as VRS), as made by the respondent/writ petitioner, by the Food Corporation of India authority. It is stated in the said writ petition that the respondent is an employee of the Food Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as the FCI). At the time of filing of the writ petition he was working as Assistant Manager under FCI. By the circular No. EP-01-04-16 dated 29/6/2004 the FCI authority prepared a VRS Scheme in respect of its officers and staff all over the country. By the said scheme, the corporation invited applications from its employees for voluntary retirement from the service and the corporation ...

Sk. Sarif Alias Puna Vs. the State

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2008)2CALLT413(HC),2008(3)CHN691

Girish Chandra Gupta, J.1. This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 31st March, 2005. passed by the learned Additional Sessions, 3rd Court, Bankura, in Session Trial No. 1 of 2004 arising out of Sessions Case No. 15 of 2003 convicting the appellant. Sk. Sarif alias Puna under Sections 363 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years a also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence punishable under Section 363 of the IPC. He was also sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. The facts and circumstances of the case briefly stated are that on 14th April,...

State of West Bengal and ors. Vs. KabiruddIn Sk. and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2008)3CALLT517(HC)

Pratap Kumar Ray, J.1. Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parties.2. Challenging the judgment and order dated 14th July, 2005 passed in W.P. No. 9888 (W) of 2005, this application has been filed by the State of West Bengal.3. By the impugned judgment under appeal the learned trial Court directed to pay interest @ 10% per annum on the retirement benefit with effect from the date of deemed retirement, namely, August 31, 1994.4. The factual matrix of the writ application was very short.5. The petitioner admittedly opted for revised pay scale and benefit under the pension including family pension-cum-gratuity in terms of Government Memo No. 136-Edn (B) dated 15th May, 1985 by filing option on 25th June, 1990. As the petitioner opted the revised pay scale, he was legally responsible to retire from service at the age of 60 years being a condition of grant of such revised pay scale as introduced by 'Ropa 1990'. But it is an admitted position that the petitioner worked till 31st Aug...

Probir Kumar Burman Vs. Kashi Nath Das

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2008(3)CHN55

Prabuddha Sankar Banerjee, J.1. These applications under Section 5 of the Limitation Act were in connection with Review Case No. 2374 of 2007 along with Review Case No. 2375 of 2007.2. It is to be mentioned here that the said review applications were filed for reviewing the common order passed by this Court on 12.3,2007 in connection with CO. No. 280 of 2006 which was taken up along with CO, No. 281 of 2006.3. The fact leading to filing of the said review application may be summed up thus.4. That the present opposite party filed one suit for eviction and for khas possession of the properties mentioned in the schedule of the plaint of T.S. No. 226 of 2006 which was filed before the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, First Court, Chandernagar.5. The said suit was decreed ex parte on 7th March, 2001 after the learned Trial Judge was satisfied regarding service of summons/notice upon the defendant.6. On 2nd May, 2003 the defendant filed one application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC read wit...

Raj Kumar Dutta Vs. Bimal Kumar Dhar

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR2008Cal190,2008(2)CHN746

Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. This first appeal is at the instance of a tenant-defendant in a suit for eviction decree on the ground of violation of Clauses (m), (o) and (p) of Section 108 of the Transfer of Property Act and reasonable requirement and is preferred against the judgment and decree dated 5th July, 1991 passed by the learned Judge, 5th Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta in Ejectment Suit No. 191 of 1982.2. The plaintiff filed the aforesaid Ejectment Suit No. 191 of 1982 for eviction of the appellant by describing him as monthly tenant under him in respect of the two rooms which had been partitioned and made into four rooms, one common bath and privy with open terrace on the first floor of the Premises No. 5A, Bhowani Dutta Lane, Calcutta - 700073.3. So far the ground of reasonable requirement is concerned, the specific case of the original plaintiff was that he required the suit property for accommodation of himself and his wife who were then staying as licensee of his broth...

Smt. Pato Mondal Vs. the New India Assurance Company Limited and anr.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2008ACJ1854

Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. All these four appeals under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 were heard analogously as points involved herein are common.2. In all these matters, Mr Banik appeared on behalf of the appellants/claimants while different learned advocates appeared on behalf of the concerned Insurance Companies.3. In all the matters, the victim was a minor and the question that arises for determination in these appeals is what should be the guidelines for assessing the compensation if the victim is a minor below the age of 15 years having no income.4. In F.M.A. No. 1805 of 2006, the victim was a boy of 15 years being a student and the Tribunal below awarded Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation.5. In F.M.A. No. 306 of 2006, the victim was aged two years and a half, and the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 50,000/- as compensation to be paid by the Insurance Company.6. In F.M.A. No. 1248 of 2007, the victim was a student of Class-VII and the Tribunal awarded Rs. 1,00,000/-as com...