Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (2008)2CALLT350(HC),2008(2)CHN954
Aniruddha Bose, J.1. The petitioners, an existing company within the meaning of Companies Act 1956 in this petition challenge three notices issued under the provisions of Section 7 of the Bengal Public Demand Recovery Act, 1913 requiring the petitioners to show cause as to why the certificates should not be executed within a period of 30 days from the date of issuance thereof. Also under challenge in this writ petition are three notices issued by the Certificate Officer, copies of which have been annexed and collectively marked 'p11' to the writ petition requiring the petitioners to pay certificate demand including interest and cost. The petitioners have also applied for stay of all further proceeding in connection with the three certificate cases initiated against them. All the notices issued under Section 7 of the 1913 Act are dated 14th December 2005, and have been issued in pursuance of requisition made by the Controlling Authority (respondent No. 1 herein) under the Payment of Gra...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 1999CriLJ2321
Gitesh Ranjan Bhattacharjee, J.1. This is an application under Section 439(2) Cr. P.C. in the cause title the application has been described as an application under Section 439(2) Cr. P.C. read with Section 482 Cr. P.C. In the prayer portion the petitioner has prayed for cancellation of the bail of accused opposite party No. 1 Ajoy Kr. Saha as well as for passing several orders and directions of different kinds, such as, direction upon the CBI to investigate the case in place of CID, West Bengal, direction for restoration of certain sections of the Indian Penal Code in the FIR, direction for arresting the accused persons for custodial interrogation, direction upon the learned SDJM to take certain document in safe custody from the I. O. and produce the same before this Court, direction for delivery of possession of certain flats alleged to have been forcibly and surreptitiously occupied by the accused Ajoy Kr. Saha etc. We have mentioned the prayers above only to indicate that this is p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
J.N. Sarma, J. 1. These cases raise the question of legality, validity and constitutionality of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institution Act, 1993 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), and other actions related to the Debt Recovery Tribunal at Guwahati constituted under the Act ('Tribunal' hereinafter). 2. In all 350 cases were filed before the Debt Recovery Tribunal at Guwahati and out of such proceedings 211 writ petitions were filed before this court and stay was granted in those cases. There are some cases five in number arising out of cases filed by co-operative banks for recovery of their dues. The Debt Recovery Tribunal entertained them. The borrowers/ debtors have challenged this action on the ground that the Tribunal does not have the power to decide a suit filed by a co-operative bank, as the definition of 'bank' in the relevant Act does not cover a co-operative bank. These cases are separated from this bunch and they have been heard separately and separate judgm...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 2008(2)CHN546
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J.1. These writ petitions were filed as Public Interest Litigations challenging the acquisition proceedings in respect of about 1000 acres of land within the following mouzas, a) Gopalnagar, b) Singherbheri, c) Beraberi, d) Khaserberi and e) Bajemelia within the Police Station of Singur in the District of Hooghly.2. Such acquisition process has been challenged by the writ petitioners mainly on the ground that the said area of land is the source of livelihood of 10,000 agricultural households and destroying the most of fertile lands which cannot be replaced, apart from the other subsidiary industries.3. The writ petitioners challenged the entire acquisition process on the ground of mala fide and arbitrary intention and further for violating the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It is further stated that for setting up a Small Car Project by Tatas would have been an acquisition of land following the Land Acquisition (Companies) Rules, 1963 (here...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (2004)190CTR(P& H)56; [2004]267ITR308(P& H)
Jawahar Lal Gupta, J.1. There are two gifts of $ 200,000 each by two donors who are not related to the assessee in favour of the assessee's two daughters, through two banks drafts bearing consecutive numbers, issued by the Midland Bank, London, on March 22, 1994. Mr. O. S. Gill who is a British citizen and a resident of the U. K. made a gift of $ 200,000 to Ms. Ruchika Oswal. Similarly, Mr. B. P. Bhardwaj, another resident of the U. K. is alleged to have made a gift of $ 200,000 in favour of the assessee's daughter, Ms. Monica Oswal. The assessee had received the two drafts on behalf of his daughters in England, to save gift-tax, the amounts were credited to the accounts of the two donees.2. The Revenue alleges that the gifts are bogus. The amount of the gifts represents the concealed income of the assessee. The Tribunal has erred in accepting the claim of the respondent-assessee and deleting the addition. The assessee claims that these are valid gifts made by two friends. The Tribunal...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : I(1999)DMC737; (1998)IIIMLJ619
C. Shivappa, J.1. This is an appeal against the order dated 21.1.1998 in O.P. No. 209 of 1996 (reported in 1998-1-LW 537) relating to the custody of a minor girl, by name, N. Asha, aged about 12 years, whose parents have unhappily been living apart. The learned Single Judge came to the conclusion that the custody of the minor girl should be with the father, and the mother now appeals to this Court.2. In deciding the question as to the custody or upbringing of a minor, the Court must regard the minor's 'welfare' as the first and paramount consideration and not the legal right of any particular party. In making order appointing a guardian for the person of minor, the tests ought to be - what order under the circumstances of the case would be best for securing the welfare and happiness of the minor With whom will the minor be happy Who is most likely to contribute to the well-being of the minor and look after her health and comfort Who is likely to bring up and educate the minor in the ma...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
N.C. Jain, J.This appeal has been filet! by the appellant against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Jorhat, convicting him under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. On conviction, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. A fine of Rs. 1000 has been imposed. In default of payment of fine, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for 6 months.1. In this case the appellant is alleged to have committed double murder of his own mother and sister aged 7 years. Two questions one factual and the other legal are involved in the appeal. The factual question is whether the prosecution has been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. If it is held that the appellant is guilty of the commission of the murders, the important and significant question of law which arises in the appeal is whether the case in hand falls under the category of rarest of rare case warranting imposition of maximum penalty of death.Coming...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 2000CriLJ3446
K.G. Balakrishnan, C.J.1. The appellant in Cont. A. No. 5/2000 is the son Of the appellant in Cont. A. No. 4/2000. These two appellants have been found guilty by a learned single Judge in suo motu contempt application No. 1/2000 and they have been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two weeks.2. The facts in short are as follows:- One V.G. Loganathan was in occupation of a portion of the building owned by the appellant in Cont. A. No. 4/2000 as a tenant. The premises was bearing the old Door No. 48 and new Door No. 44 Nethaji Street, Ponniammanmedu,Chennai-110 and he was conducting a rice mill. He was paying a rent of Rs. 7000/- per month. The said tenant filed O.S., No. 1421/97 before the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvotriyur alleging that he had already surrendered possession of a portion of the building used for rice mill to the appellant Balakrishnan and is in possession of only a portion of the building and the appellant Balakrishnan had been trying to evi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1999)3CALLT103(HC)
K.J. Sengupta, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order No.4 dated 18th of December, 1996 passed by the learned judge. 3rd Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta in Title Suit No. 3660 of 1996, granting an ad interim injunction in favour of the respondent No. 1 restraining the appellants from evicting him from the suit premises till disposal of the injunction application.2. In short, the facts of the case infer alia, are that the appellants are the owners of premises No. 30, Creeck Row, Calcutta-14. The respondent No. 2 was the licensee in respect of 7 rooms on the first floor of the suit premises with clear understanding that he would vacate the suit premises as and when demanded by the owners. Since, in spite of repeated demands, the licensee did not vacate the suit premises, the appellants along with their mother Sudhanghshudebi Moitra. since deceased, filed SCC Suit No. 2766 of 1982 under section 41 of the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act for eviction of the said licensee namel...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : 2006(1)JKJ7
Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J.1. These appeals are outcome of an award passed by learned Presiding officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Srinagar in the claim petitioner titled as Abdul Qayoom Dar and Ors. v. National Insurance Co. and Ors., Safiya and Ors. v. National Insurance Co. and Ors., Mst. Raja Begum and Ors. v. National Insurance Co. and Ors., Mst. Jawa and Ors. v. National Insurance Co. and Ors., Mohammad Ayub Bhat v. Mohammad Aslam Khan and Ors. dated 29th November 2003, hereinafter, shall be referred as impugned award.2. The appellants have assailed the impugned award in all these appeals on the ground which can be aptly and precisely summarized as under:That the claimants/respondents have failed to prove that driver has driven the offending vehicle Tata Sumo bearing registration No. 2166/JK04 rashly and negligently. That multiplier has been applied wrongly in all the claim petitions. The age of the petitioners/claimants should have been taken into consideration and not the age o...
Tag this Judgment!