Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: appropriation act 2006 Sorted by: recent Court: kolkata Page 1 of about 15,166 results (0.090 seconds)

Kamala Gupta Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : 2006(4)CHN219

..... 3 has been acting in a manner which amounts to violation of the hon'ble court's order dated 26.4.2006 and seek appropriate orders. ..... it is made clear that dismissal of the present petition shall not preclude the petitioner from exercising her rights conferred by the provisions of the code of criminal procedure before the appropriate forum against alleged criminal intimidation or any other act perpetrated by the respondent no. ..... 3 without any valid sanction plan, sufficient powers are conferred on the said corporation by the kolkata municipal corporation act to deal with it appropriately. ..... 3 and his associates have threatened the petitioner and her family members with dire consequences and such an act has been reported to the police, it is the statutory duty of the respondent no. ..... during the pendency of the said writ petition, the petitioner on 17.3.2006 has preferred the present petition. ..... copy of the order dated 26.4.2006 has been placed before this court. ..... however when this petition was taken up for hearing, it has been disclosed before this court that an order has been passed on 26.4.2006 disposing of the said petition. ..... 4963 (w) of 2006 has been disposed of by this hon'ble court on 26.4.2006 with a direction upon the executive engineer, borough no. ..... same is the position with the allegation made in the complaint dated 13.3.2006 in this regard. ..... in any event by the order dated 26.4.2006 the respondent no. ..... 2) in writing on 13.3.2006 indicating the threat given by the respondent no. .....

The Peerless General Finance and Investment Vs. Commissioner of Income ...

Court : Kolkata

..... for the department submits that, notice under section 148 of the act of 1961 was issued after obtaining the prior approval of the appropriate authority. ..... above, a notice under section 148 of the act of 1961, the reasons for invocation of such provisions of the act of 1961 and the ultimate decision of the assessing officer on the objection raised thereto found in the decision dated september 22, 2006 are under challenge in the present writ petition. ..... circumstances, the impugned notice dated march 22, 2006 and the impugned order dated september 22, 2006 passed by the authorities are set aside. ..... that, it cannot be said or alleged that, the assessing officer had acted with an inherent lack of jurisdiction in an invocation of section 148 of the act of 1961 or in passing the impugned order dated june 22, 2006. ..... as the question with regard to the notice under section 148 of the act of 1961 not being issued after obtaining permission from the higher authority is concerned, it appears from the record produced in court on behalf of the department, inspection forthwith being given to the learned senior advocate for the petitioner in court that, the authorities did obtain permission from the higher authorities on march 22, 2006 itself. ..... order sheet wp no.1952 of 2006 in the high court at calcutta constitutional writ jurisdiction original side the peerless general finance & investment versus commissioner of income tax-i, kolkata & ors.before: the hon'ble justice debangsu basak date : 6th .....

Central Bank of India Vs. R.K. Agencies Limited

Court : Kolkata

..... mr.mookherjee was critical about the letter dated august 7, 2006, the bank appropriated the sum without any reference to court that would be illegal and would be liable to be ..... contend, under the agreement as pleaded by the bank, the plaintiff was supposed to obtain appropriate permission from the reserve bank under the foreign exchange regulation act to repatriate the money abroad. ..... azam khan versus the official receiver reported in all india reporter 1928 sind page-63 to contend, the contract, if any, as pleaded by the plaintiff was barred in terms of section 32 as it was contingent upon appropriate permission under the foreign exchange regulation act. ..... of deblocking, mr.mookherjee would rely upon the letter dated june 23, 2006 and july 26, 2006 appearing at page 62-65 of the compilation wherein we find, the enforcement directorate categorically observed, no charge could be framed under the foreign exchange regulation act and thus the fixed deposit was deblocked. ..... (2) in the high court at calcutta civil appellate jurisdiction original side present : the hon ble acting chief justice ashim kumar banerjee and the hon ble justice arijit banerjee a.p.d.no.357 of 2012 c.s.no.297 of 1987 central bank of india versus r.k.agencies limited for the appellant : mr.hirak mitra, senior ..... in their letter observed, the understanding for arrangement sought to be arrived at, in terms of our letter dated 27 november, 1984 was never acted upon and nothing definite was achieved between the parties . .....

M/S. Surveillance Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ircon Employees Cooper ...

Court : Kolkata

..... section 102(1)(d) of the said act of 2006, in its relevant part, provides that any dispute between a co-operative society and any person having transaction with such society shall have to be carried before the registrar identified by such act for settlement. ..... nothing in this order will prevent the petitioner to approach the registrar in accordance with law and if the petitioner files the claim, the registrar is requested to take appropriate steps as expeditiously as possible. ..... ap no.970 of 2013 is dismissed as the arbitration clause contained in the agreement between the parties cannot be given effect to in derogation of section 102(1)(d) of the said act of 2006. ..... there is no dispute that the respondent is a co-operative society governed by the west bengal co-operative societies act, 2006. ..... the respondent says that in view of section 102(1)(d) of the said act that provides for the exclusive manner of settlement of disputes, no other mechanism for the resolution of the disputes between the parties can be resorted to. ..... section 103 of the act provides the manner of settlement of disputes by the constitution of a board of arbitrators.in view of such provision, the private arbitration agreement between the petitioner and the respondent co-operative society cannot be accepted as the same is in derogation of the .....

Coal India Limited Vs. Apeejay House Private Ltd.

Court : Kolkata

..... he also distinguished the decision in the case of tarak chandra mukherjee (supra) wherein the full bench of the calcutta high court observed, unless it thought that if the act of 1950 was allowed to expire, no rights, liabilities or remedies under it would survive .the learned advocate general would rely upon paragraph 28 of the said decision to show, a protection available under an old law could only be continued in ..... the protection under the old tenancy law was no more available to the tenant in view of the provisions of section 6(5) of the west bengal premises tenancy act, 1997 wherein the protection under the old law was continued for two years and on expiry of two years period such protection was no more available to those tenants whose protection was not preserved by ..... the learned single judge failed to appreciate, there were triable issues to be decided at the appropriate stage and an application under chapter xiii-a would not be maintainable. ..... of lease, enjoyed protection under the old tenancy law as the lease was for ten years being less than twenty one years.the new tenancy law being the west bengal premises tenancy act, 1997 coming into force with effect from july 10, 2001, the old law stood repealed under section 65. ..... apeejay terminated the tenancy by notice dated january 4, 2006 issued under section 106 of the transfer of property act, 1882 and filed a suit for recovery of possession. .....

Hindusthan Pilkington Glass Works Ltd. (In Liquidation) and Wellworth ...

Court : Kolkata

..... state would be entitled to deny mutation of the name of the appellant in the record of rights or they would be entitled to call back the excess land in terms of section 6(3) of the said act of 1953, would be exclusively within the domain of the state and would not be available for judicial review of the learned company judge. ..... once the hearing was concluded in 2006, it was incumbent upon the hearing authority to pass appropriate orders, directing mutation. ..... appellant would feel aggrieved by any act of the state, it would have the remedy in law to approach the appropriate forum. ..... are divested of the possession that would frustrate the sale, sale was an act of court for which the appellant must not suffer. ..... was initially admitted by this court, this court considering equity, keeping it in mind the issue of revival of the industrial unit, wanted to intervene and act as a conciliator between the state and the purchaser. ..... paragraphs 100 and 104 of the said decision to support his contention, for act of court the litigant must not suffer. ..... he lastly contended, for act of court the litigant should ..... 20, 1980 the assistant settlement officer, asansol issued a notice, asking the company to submit the requirement of land as the company was allowed to retain 45.87 acres, in terms of section 6(3) of west bengal estate acquisition act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the said act of 1953). ..... that as far back on may 20, 1980 the state initiated proceedings under section 6(3) of the said act of 1953. .....

Ajit Kumar Agarwal Vs. Nischintapur Tea Company Ltd. and Others

Court : Kolkata

..... however, find that during pendency of the said proceeding the lady obtained appropriate order from the succession court in respect of the subject shares. mr ..... desor (supra) by saying that the lady duly obtained appropriate order from the succession court during pendency of the proceeding whereas ajit did not approach the succession court as yet ..... iii) december 20, 2010 application for appropriate interim relief in the suit was dismissed by the learned judge holding it ..... denied mutation for eight hundred shares of maidhan and one thousand nine hundred forty shares of sarbati on the ground of that ajit must get appropriate order from the succession court. ..... sen placed the appropriate provisions under section 397 to section 399 to demonstrate that ajit could not have any ..... application before the company law board under section 111(a) of the said act of 1956 in 2006 that is still pending as we are told. ..... death of the parents and brother, ajit initiated proceeding under section 111(a) in 2006 as stated above that was pending before the company law board. ..... he contended that the proceeding was pending from 1985 to 2006 whereas ajit acquired shares firstly from his father when he died in the year 1968 and then in 1986 when his ..... in a proceeding under section 397 of the companies act 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the said act of 1956) the learned single judge by an order dated june 21, 1985 appearing at page 19 of the compilation appointed special officer for inspection and inventory of the books .....

Ajit Kumar Agarwal. Vs. Nischintapur Tea Company Ltd. and ors.

Court : Kolkata

..... , find that during pendency of the said proceeding the lady obtained appropriate order from the succession court in respect of the subject shares. ..... desor (supra) by saying that the lady duly obtained appropriate order from the succession court during pendency of the proceeding whereas ajit did not approach the succession court ..... iii) december 20, 2010 application for appropriate interim relief in the suit was dismissed by the learned judge holding it ..... denied mutation for eight hundred shares of maidhan and one thousand nine hundred forty shares of sarbati on the ground of that ajit must get appropriate order from the succession court. ..... mr.sen placed the appropriate provisions under section 397 to section 399 to demonstrate that ajit could not have any ..... application before the company law board under section 111(a) of the said act of 1956 in 2006 that is still pending as we are told. ..... death of the parents and brother, ajit initiated proceeding under section 111(a) in 2006 as stated above that was pending before the company law board. ..... he contended that the proceeding was pending from 1985 to 2006 whereas ajit acquired shares firstly from his father when he died in the year 1968 and then in 1986 when his ..... omprakash filed a petition under section 155 of the companies act, 1956 inter alia, claiming transmission of two thousand twenty one shares which he purchased from scattered share holders.omprakash also filed a suit being suit no.1045 of 1968 on april 29, 1968 for declaration that .....

Usha MartIn Limited -and- Vs. the Registrar of Companies, West

Court : Kolkata

..... of the several charges levelled in the show-cause notice of april 17, 2009, the present petition is restricted to seven, including three for 2 alleged violation of the provisions of section 209(3)(b) of the act, and the other four for violation of the provisions of section 211 of the act whether read with schedule vi to the act or with the accounting standards, adherence to which has become mandatory under the amended provisions of section 211. ..... in respect of the other charges, the petitioner nos.1 to 11 say that appropriate steps have been taken under section 621a of the companies act. ..... the court : the petition under section 633(2) of the companies act, 1956 relates to seven charges included by the registrar in a show- cause notice of april 17, 2009. ..... the alleged violations under section 211 of the act relate to the treatment of accounts and reflect the varying opinions of the company and 3 the registrar as to the manner of treatment of certain entries. ..... the charges levelled under section 209(3)(b) relate to the dealing of the interest received by the company and cover the annual accounts of the company for the periods ended march 31, 2006, march 31, 2007 and march 31, 2008. ..... it appears that the registrar's office noticed the perceived discrepancies following an inspection under section 209a of the act. .....

Lekha Duary Vs. Ranjit Rana and anr.

Court : Kolkata

..... case no.42 of 2006 under sections 8 and 9 of the west bengal land reforms act, 1955 against the petitioner and other opposite party before the appropriate court. ..... decision of this court in hukumdev narain yadav case and subsequently followed in anwari basavaraj patil case even though special or local law does not state in so many words expressly that section 5 of the limitation act is not applicable to the proceedings under those act, from the scheme of the act and having regard to various provisions such express exclusion could be gathered.thus, a conscious and intentional omission by the legislature to apply section 5 of the limitation ..... act to the proceedings under section 8 of the act, looking to the scheme of the act, nature of right of pre-emption and express application of section 5 of the limitation act to the other provisions under the act, itself means and amounts to express exclusion .....