Kolkata Court October 2009 Judgments

Sri Amar Kumar Barik and ors. Vs. National Instruments Limited and ors ...

Court: Kolkata

S.P. Talukdar, J.1. The employees of certain Public Sector Enterprises filed several writ petitions with regard to pay revision of the Central Public Sector Employees following Central Dearness Allowance (hereinafter referred to as 'CDA') pattern in 69 Public Sector Enterprises of the Government of India. In pursuance of the directives given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 14th March, 1986 in connection with those writ petitions, the Government of India appointed a High Power Pay Committee on 7th April, 1986 under the Chairmanship of the Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. B. Misra (as His Lordship then was), which gave its final report to the Government of India on 24th November, 1988 recommending Central Government pay structure for all the 69 Public Sector Enterprises including National Instruments Limited, being respondent No. 1 herein. By judgment dated 3rd May, 1990, the Apex Court directed implementation of the recommendation of the High Power Pay Committee Report. Ministry of Programme Impl...

Steel Authority of India Limited and ors. Vs. Gulf (Oil) Corporation L ...

Court: Kolkata

Indira Banerjee, J.1. This application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, hereinafter referred to as the 1996 Act, is for setting aside of an arbitral award dated 7th May, 2007 made by learned sole arbitrator Sri Ajit Kr. Sengupta, a retired Judge of this Court.2. Disputes and differences arose between the respondent and the petitioner in connection with a contract for supply of explosives and in particular the action of the petitioner in taking recourse to risk purchase of explosives at the cost of the respondent and withholding payment of bills raised by the respondent.3. The petitioner invoked the arbitration clause in the agreement between the petitioner and the respondent and sought reference of the disputes to arbitration. Unable to secure the appointment of an arbitrator, the petitioner made an application being A.P. No. 194 of 2005, in this Court under Section 11 of the 1996 Act requesting the Chief Justice to appoint an arbitrator.4. When the appli...

Subhas Ranjan Ghosal Vs. the Howrah Municipal Corporation and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition dated August 7, 2007 is aggrieved by the decision of the Borough Committee of Borough-5 of the Howrah Municipal Corporation dated January 12, 2005( at p.40) communicated by one Abha Mukherjee, to the fifth respondent, Baby Ghosh, one of the persons responsible for erection of the unauthorised constructions. The decision written in Bengali says that after a detailed discussion in a meeting the borough committee decided (i) that the person responsible for erection of the unauthorised constructions should submit an affidavit from a first class judge that the person would not erect unauthorized constructions in future and would, at own expense, demolish the unauthorised constructions, if any, erected in future; (ii) that the decision to fine the person would be taken thereafter; and (iii) that on failure to deposit the fine within fifteen days from the date of receipt of the letter for the purpose, an order would be issued for...

Sri Dayal Saha and anr. Vs. Official Liquidator

Court: Kolkata

Aniruddha Bose, J.1. The Company involved in this present proceeding being M/s. SST Media Pvt. Ltd.[in liquidation] is engaged in the business of running a television channel. On the allegation of inability of the Company to discharge its debts, at the instance of creditors of the company, order for winding up had been passed on 21st May 2009. Subsequently, a group of employees approached this Court with a plea for revival of the Company in liquidation and at their instance on 1st September 2009 this Court had stayed further proceedings in relation to the winding up of the Company. It appears that the employees of the Company had approached a financier/investor from another Company being R.P. Techvision (India) Pvt. Ltd. for the purpose of obtaining finance for revival of the Company. The order staying further proceedings has been extended from time to time and subsists at present.2. Mr. Bimal Chatterjee, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the R.P. Techvision (India) Pvt. Ltd., submi...

Agarpara Jute Mills Limited Vs. United India Insurance Co. Limited and ...

Court: Kolkata

Sanjib Banerjee, J.1. The petitioners complain of the effective repudiation of the petitioners' claim by the respondent Insurance Company on the ground that documents sought by the Insurance Company or the surveyor had not been furnished.2. In fact, the Insurance Company did not technically repudiate the claim, but informed the petitioners that in the absence of the petitioners producing the documents in support of the claim, the relevant file was being closed.3. Following an inspection by the surveyor, a detailed demand was made on the petitioner company by a letter dated November 28,2005 for particulars of machinery, furniture, stocks and other material being produced. The petitioners replied on April 11,2006 claiming a total amount of Rs. 1,22,95,250/- on account of stock in process,finished goods, repairs, replacement of machinery and repair of building. The petitioners' letter promised that supporting documents would follow, but no other material was furnished in support of the cl...

Sulake Plastocom Private Limited and anr. Vs. State Bank of Patiala an ...

Court: Kolkata

Sanjib Banerjee, J.1. Following a notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and the steps taken by the respondent bank under Section 13(4) of the said Act, the writ petitioners instituted proceedings under Section 17 of the Act before the appropriate Debts Recovery Tribunal. An order was passed in such proceedings on October 9, 2007 by which the parties were directed to maintain status quo till the adjourned date. The petitioners say that such order continued till the proceedings were disposed of.2. It is the petitioners' contention that during the proceedings before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, the petitioners and the bank entered into a settlement which resulted in the bank issuing a letter dated April 12, 2008 to the petitioners. The bank apparently sanctioned a fresh loan. In pursuance of the settlement and the bank's letter of April 12, 2008, the petitioners withdrew the proceedings under ...

Sakirul Islam and ors. Vs. the State of West Bengal and anr.

Court: Kolkata

Ashim Kumar Roy, J.1. The subject matter of challenge in the present criminal revision is an order of issuance of search warrant on the prayer of the police in connection with a case relating to the offence punishable under Sections 497/406/120B of the Indian Penal Code.2. Mr. Abhijit Ganguly, the Learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to the order impugned and vehemently urged that the Learned Court below allowed the prayer of the Investigating Officer and issued search warrant mechanically. According to him the said order does not contain any reason which prompted the Court below to issue the impugned search warrant and reflects complete non-application of mind. He, thus, prays for quashing of the said order. Mr. Ganguly in support of his contention heavily relied on a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V.S. Kuttan Pillai v. Ram Krishnan and Anr. reported in : (1980) 1 SCC 264.On the other hand, Mr. Apurba Kumar Dutt...

Peerless General Finance and Investment Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of I ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2010)228CTR(Cal)72,[2010]320ITR622(Cal)

Pinaki Chandra Ghose 1. The instant appeal under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the asst. yr. 1989-90 was admitted for hearing on the following questions of law:(1) Whether disallowance under Section 143(1)(a) of the IT Act, 1961 can be made merely because proof in support of a claim made in the return is not annexed to the return?(2) Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the disallowance made by the AO falls within the purview of prima facie adjustment within the meaning of Section 143(1)(a) and its purported finding in this behalf are arbitrary, unreasonable and perverse?2. The facts of the case briefly are as follows:(a) The assessee filed its returns for the asst. yr. 1989-90 along with the tax audit report under Section 44AB of the Act. In the computation of income, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs. 21,12,766 under Section 80G, being 50 per cent of the donation amount of Rs. 42,25,533. Serial No.7 of the tax audit repor...

Samir Dutta and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal

Court: Kolkata

Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.1. On November 9, 2004 at about 11.00 A.M. Shri Parthasarathi Mazumdar, a police officer attached to Alipurduar P.S. received a telephonic information that four persons assembled at Assam Gate with Canabis (Ganja) in a V.I.P. suitcase and kid bag. He entered the information in the general diary and left for the place of occurrence along with Shri T.K. Das, Sub-inspector and Pasang Tamang, Assistant Sub-inspector and other police constables. After arrival, they found that four persons were standing with V.I.P. suitcase and kit bag. On disclosure of their identity they asked the persons to opt as to whether they would offer their belongings to be searched by the police authority. The said persons demanded presence of gazetted officer and accordingly the police party requested Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Alipurduar to depute an Executive Magistrate for the said purpose. Accordingly at about 11:50 A.M. Shri Kajal Kumar Roy, learned Sub-Divisional Executive Magistrate...

Smt. Anju Kundu Vs. Sri Shyamal Kumar Kundu and anr.

Court: Kolkata

Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. This first appeal is at the instance of a wife who was a defendant in a suit for declaration that the marriage was a nullity, and in the alternative, for divorce on the ground of cruelty and is directed against the judgment and decree dated 20th March, 2006 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, First Court, Murshidabad, in Matrimonial Suit No. 256 of 1996, thereby declaring the marriage to be nullity on the ground of suppression of material fact concerning the wife.2. Being dissatisfied, the wife has come up with the present first appeal.3. The husband-respondent filed in the Court of District Judge, Nadia a suit being Matrimonial Suit No. 77 of 1994 which was subsequently, on basis of an order passed by this Court on an application of the wife under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, transferred to the Court of Additional District Judge, First Court, Murshidabad at Berhampore and was renumbered as Matrimonial Suit No. 256 of 1996.4. The ca...