Kolkata Court September 2008 Judgments
Maya Rani Sur Alias Maya Debi Sur Vs. Sankar Chandra Majumder and Jaym ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-30-2008
Reported in: (2008)IVCALLT233(HC)
Partha Sakha Datta, J.1. The two applications are being disposed of by this common order.2. The petitioner in both the cases is one Smt. Maya Rani Sur. She instituted Title Suit No. 260 of 2002 against Sankar Chandra Majumder, the opposite party in C.O. No. 1897 of 2008 praying for eviction of the said opposite party and for recovery of khas possession of the suit premises and for damages etc. which is a shop room as described in the schedule to the plaint of Title Suit No. 260 of 2002 on the ground that the tenancy was determined by a notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. Many a grounds were advanced in the plaint including the grounds of default, commission of nuisance and annoyance etc., which are not necessary for disposal of the two applications.3. The learned Trial Court decreed the suit by judgment and decree dated 30th of July, 2007.4. Being aggrieved with the said judgment and decree the opposite party preferred the appeal before the learned Additional Dist...
Tag this Judgment!P.G. and Sawoo P. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-t ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2008
Reported in: (2008)221CTR(Cal)36,[2008]307ITR243(Cal),[2009]176TAXMAN326(Cal)
Pinaki chandra Ghose, J.1. A reference has been made by the hon'ble Division Bench on the question that whether there is a direct conflict of decisions delivered by the hon'ble Division Bench in the decision of Hope (India) Ltd. v. CIT : [1999]238ITR740(Cal) and in the decision of Hamilton and Co. P. Ltd. v. CIT : [1992]194ITR391(Cal) . The reference has been made to resolve the conflict between the said two decisions of the hon'ble Division Bench. The matter has been referred before the Larger Bench to resolve the conflict in respect of the said two decisions.2. The question relates to whether additional or extra rent attributable to preceding years of account which could not be taxed under Section 22 of the Act should be taxed under the head 'Income from other sources'. The said question was decided by the hon'ble Division Bench in the case of Hamilton and Co. P. Ltd. : [1992]194ITR391(Cal) when their Lordships observed (page 394):The question is whether the arrears of rent relating ...
Tag this Judgment!State of West Bengal and anr. Vs. Sati Enclave Pvt. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)CHN499
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. This first appeal is at the instance of the State of West Bengal and the Additional Registrar of Assuranee-I and is directed against order dated 15th April, 2008 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court by which the learned Judge rejected an application filed by the appellant for recalling of the order dated 4th December, 2006 by which the said learned Single Judge while confirming the sale in a partition suit recorded that the consideration money for which the property had been sold by the order of the Court should be treated to be the value for the purpose of registration and stamp-duty.2. The following facts are not in dispute.3. In a partition suit numbered as Extraordinary Suit No. 32 of 1987, an order was passed on 15th September, 1987 with regard to the sale of the properties being 20 to 20/14, Chetla Road, Kolkata-27 and subsequently, various orders were made from time to time.4. By an order dated 9th December, 2005, the learned Joint Receivers ...
Tag this Judgment!RabIn Kumar Chandra Vs. Sikha Chandra
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)CHN511
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. This first appeal is at the instance of a defendant-husband in a suit for maintenance under the provision of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and is directed against the judgment and decree dated 25th September, 2001 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Seventh Court, Alipore, in Money Suit No. 41 of 1997 thereby passing a decree in favour of the plaintiff with a direction for payment of maintenance at the rate of Rs. 3,000/- a month for herself and the minor son of the parties.2. Being dissatisfied, the defendant-husband has preferred this appeal and at the same time, the plaintiff-wife has filed a cross-objection for enhancement of the amount to Rs. 5,000/- a month. Both the matters were taken up together.3. The amended plaint cases are as follows:(a) The parties were married on 13th December, 1990 according to Hindu Rites and in the said wedlock, a male child was bom on 15th March, 1992. The said son...
Tag this Judgment!Deb Kumar Bhabani @ D.K. Bhabani and ors. Vs. Mohini Debi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)CHN711
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. These two appeals were heard one after the other as the learned Trial Judge had disposed of the two suits out of which these appeals arise by delivering a common judgment.2. The predecessor-in-interest of the appellant before us filed a suit being Ejectment Suit No. 182 of 1990 in the City Civil Court at Calcutta against Sankar Lal Singhania and four others, describing them to be the heirs and legal representatives of one Radha Kishan Agarwala, since deceased, for eviction on the ground of default in payment of rent from January, 1988 and for subletting to one Moni Debi after the promulgation of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 without the previous consent of the plaintiff in writing.3. The case made out in the plaint of the said suit was that the plaintiff was the owner of the suit property and Radha Kishan Agarwala was tenant in respect of one flat in the first floor at a monthly rental of Rs. 135/- (exclusive of pump service charges of Rs. 20/- a...
Tag this Judgment!Kwality Ice Creams (India) (P.) Ltd., in Re
Court: Company Law Board CLB Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-2008
Reported in: 2009(148)CC631; 2009(91)SCL231(CLB-KOL.)
1. The petitioner company has presented this petition under section 17 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”); for confirmation of the alteration to the situation clause in the Memorandum of Association of the company for shifting of the registered office of the company from the State of West Bengal to the National Capital Territory of Delhi, as approved by a Special Resolution passed in accordance with section 189 of the Companies Act, 1956, at its Annual General Meeting held on 24-9-2004. An application filed by the company seeking extension of time in filing the petition, is allowed. 2. Initially, Director, Economic Offences Investigation Cell, Finance Department, Government of West Bengal, vide his letters dated 8-7-2005, had raised certain queries in respect of the company regarding non-payment of Sales Tax/Profession Tax and non-payment of compensation to the employees for transferring the company to M/s. Hindustan Lever Limited. In reply, t...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Adhirath Mondal Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-24-2008
Reported in: (2008)IVCALLT330(HC)
Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay, J.1. This appeal has been preferred on behalf of the writ petitioner assailing the judgment and order passed by the learned single Judge whereby and whereunder the said learned Judge rejected the claim of the appellant/writ petitioner regarding regularisation of his service.2. It appears from the records that the appellant herein was appointed in a Group 'D' post of Night Guard-cum-Sweeper in Nakole Gram Panchayat on 30th January, 1991 pursuant to the resolution adopted by the members of the said Gram Panchayat. The said appointment of the appellant was thereafter, confirmed in the meeting of the Gram Panchayat on July 8, 1993.3. It has been alleged on behalf of the appellant that the new Pradhan of the said Gram Panchayat after taking charge of the office initially did not allow the appellant/writ petitioner to sign the Attendance Register and thereafter, informed the said appellant that the members of the Gram Panchayat had passed a resolution to terminate...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Prativa Biswas and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-23-2008
Reported in: (2008)IVCALLT192(HC),2009(1)CHN101
Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay, J.1. This appeal has been preferred at the instance of the writ petitioners assailing the judgment and order dated 12th April, 2006 passed by the learned single Judge whereby and whereunder the said learned Judge refused to grant any relief to the writ petitioners.2. The writ petitioners are the Nursing staff of the hospitals which were previously under the administrative control of the Coal Mines Labour Welfare Organisation and subsequently, transferred to the Eastern Coalfields Ltd. a subsidiary of Coal India Limited.3. In view of abolition of the Coal Mines Labour Welfare Organisation, Government of India decided to transfer the hospitals which were under the administrative control of the said Coal Mines Labour Welfare Organisation to the subsidiaries of Coal India Limited. The appellants/writ petitioners were also given option to join in the services of the Coal Company. The writ petitioners joined the Coal Company upon exercising their option.4. It was ...
Tag this Judgment!Samiran Sen Vs. Arpita Sen
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-23-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Cal229,(2008)4CALLT508(HC)
Biswanath Somadder, J.1. Heard the learned advocates for the parties.2. This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India primarily directed against an order, being order No. 15 dated 24th August, 2007, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Kalna in Miscellaneous Execution Case No. 2 of 2006.3. The petitioner in the instant application is the husband of the opposite party.4. By the order impugned, the learned Court below was pleased to take the petitioner into custody on his failure to pay the outstanding maintenance claim of his wife. It appears from the order impugned that the learned Court below asked the petitioner as to whether he wanted to pay such outstanding claim to his wife who had brought the proceeding and in reply he had said that he was not in a position to make any payment and prayed for time to contact his relatives to find out a solution. The learned Court below, however, was pleased to remand the petitioner to judicial custody.5. From pe...
Tag this Judgment!Birla Corporation Ltd. (Unit Soorah Jute Mill) Sramik Union Vs. Birla ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-23-2008
Reported in: (2009)1CALLT73(HC),2008(4)CHN592,[2009(121)FLR332],(2009)IIILLJ656Cal
Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay, J.1. All the three appeals have been preferred from the same judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge at the instance of the State of West Bengal and two other Trade Unions of one Jute Mill respectively. We have heard these appeals analogously and the same are also disposed of by this common judgment.2. The principal question of law to be decided in these appeals is whether the dispute referred by the impugned order of reference is an 'industrial dispute' within the meaning of Section 2k of the Industrial Disputes Act?3. The facts leading to these appeals are briefly narrated hereinafter.4. The respondent/writ-petitioner Biria Corporation Limited being the owner of Soorah Jute Mill decided to shift the said jute mill to Birlapur, 24-Parganas (South) and the Managing Director of the said company submitted its aforesaid proposal for shifting the said jute mill to the State Government in the year 2001.5. The State Government, however, by a written ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »