Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Dec-17-1992
Reported in : AIR1994Cal152,(1993)1CALLT501(HC)
order1. the present writ petition is at the instance of one bijay shankar tripathi praying, inter alia, for a writ of mandamus to command the respondents to mutate the name of the petitioner in place of ram shankar tripathi and/or smt. ramkali tripathi as the owner of the said premises and to grant other consequential reliefs. it is stated in details that ram shankar tripathi was the recorded owner of the premises no. 163, rabindra sarani, calcutta, ward no. 43 and he died intestate on september 26, 1974 leaving behind him his wife ramkali tripathi as the only heir and legal representative. ramkali tripathi inherited the saidproperty. the respondent no. 2 municipal commissioner, calcutta instituted a suit for non-payment of arrear municipal taxes against ram shankar tripathi being suit no. 2342 of 1966. it is stated further that ramkali tripathi died on march 24, 1978 leaving a will and the said will was probated on march 18, 1986 by the chief judge, city civil court, calcutta. it is further stated that the respondents i.e., the municipal authorities instituted a suit against the petitioner before the learned judge city civil court at calcutta being title suit no. 2244 of 1986 for recovery of arrear taxes for the third quarter of 1968-69. on december 15, 1989 the petitioner made an application for mutation of his name in regard to the said premises. the grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of specific prayer for mutation the same has not been effected although the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jun-26-1992
Reported in : AIR1993Cal39,(1992)2CALLT475(HC),1992(2)CHN163,97CWN368
orderthis is an application filed by the writ petitioner substantially for a declaration that the building plan and application for sanction to build at 4a wood-burn park, filed by the predecessor in interest of the writ petitioner with the municipal authorities stands approved by operation of law.2. three dates are the most material in the disposal of this application. on the 4th of january, 1984, the calcutta municipal corporation act, 1980, came into force repealing the earlier municipal act of 1951 by s. 635-thereof. however, the very same section preserved the building rules which had formed schedule xvi to the said earlier act of 1951.3. on the 25th february, 1988, one smt. ana ghosh made an application for sanction to build after demolition of existing structures in relation to the land and premises in question. the requisite fees for the said application were also paid. it should be clarified that the submission of the building plan was made by smt. ghosh on 3rd december, 1987 and the fees were paid on the 25th february, 1988 and for our purposes we shall assume that the application was duly completed by or behalf of smt. ana ghosh on the 25th of february, 1988.4. on the 12th of december, 1990, new building rules replaced the earlier building rules which had formed schedule xvi of the 1951 act and which had been continued by the 1980 act.5. mr. siddhartha sankar ray and mr. pijush kanti dutta both made submissions on behalf of the writ petitioner on different dates. .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Decided on : May-14-1992
Reported in : (1992)2CALLT274(HC)
paritosh kumar mukherjee, j.1. this is an appeal directed against the appellate judgment and order dated 20th january, 1976, passed by the learned additional district judge, burdwan, in title appeal no. 192 of 1974 in dismissing the appeal, preferred by the plaintiff-appellants (herein) and thereby affirming the judgment of the learned munsif, second court, durgapur, by which the suit for declaration of title in respect of the suit property, filed by the plaintiff was dismissed.2. this appeal comes up for final hearing in the absence of the state respondent.3. the short facts arising in this appeal are as follows :the land as described in the title of the plaint was a 'tank fishery' and it was used for pisciculture and for fishing from time immemorial. one shri nirshengha murari pal and three others were the owners of the 'tank fishery' in the suit and the same was taken settlement by one shibapada paramanik in 1358 b.s. only at an annual rental of rs. 10/-. shibapada paramanik was in possession of the suit property and it was recorded in his name in the r.s. khatian and shibapada was paying rent to the former landlords after even vesting estates to the state of west bengal.4. according to the plaintiff, shibapada had no excess lands above the ceiling of the suit land being a 'tank fishery' and, as such, it cannot be vested to the state of west bengal. the present plaintiff purchased a suit land by a registered kobala dated 1st october, 1966, and since then the plaintiffs .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jul-22-1992
Reported in : (1993)1CALLT41(HC)
khwaja mohammad yusuf, j.1. this appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 3rd july, 1986 passed by a learned single judge discharging the rule. the case of the writ petitioner, inter alia, is that he joined as a tahsildar on 13th january, 1971 after executing an agreement and in terms of the said agreement the appellant's service is governed by the government servants' conduct rules and the west bengal services (classification, control and appeal) rules, 1971. the subdivisional officer, alipur sadar by an order dated 24th december, 1977 terminated the petitioner/appellant's service with effect from 1st january, 1978 in terms of clause 11 of the said agreement. his grievance is that his services were terminated without affording him any opportunity to show cause and without giving him any opportunity of hearing or conducting any departmental enquiry into his conduct. the charge against him is : (i) manipulation of false signatures which he admitted in writing ; (ii) he was involved in manipulating some forged mutation orders which is under investigation in bhangar police station case no. 21 of 1978 ; and (iii) he fabricated false signatures of another tahsildar on some rent receipts. .2. the allegations made against the appellant are refuted by him and he in his affidavit-in-reply annexed a certificate from the district enforcement officer, bhangar zone, 24-parganas that he was not wanted in connection with bhangar police station case no. 21 of 1978. but .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jan-24-1992
Reported in : AIR1993Cal33,(1992)2CALLT46(HC)
orderl.m. ghosh, j.1. the petitioner,madan mohan manna, filed an application under section 13 of the hindu marriage act, 1955 for a decree against the respondent/wife annulling the marriage and such other reliefs. the suit was contested by the respondent/ wife, chitra manna. the learned trial judge dismissed the suit.2. this appeal has been preferred against that judgment of dismissal.3. admittedly, the marriage between the parties took place on 12-3-80, according to hindu rites and customs. it is also not disputed that the parties resided together in the matrimonial home for about seven days. according to the petitioner, after that, the respondent's father took her away with her ornaments and other articles. the petitioner further alleged that on diverse dates, he made attempts to bring back the wife, but all these attempts became futile as the respondent refused to come to the matrimonial home. on 7-7-80, the petitioner sent a registered letter through advocate, calling upon the respondent to come back within seven days. in the petition itself, it is admitted that in the reply dated 16-7-80, the respondent referred to an application before the gram panchayat for redress. after all that, the petitioner filed matrimonial suit no. 85 of 1980 for restitution of conjugal right. the respondent filed a written statement in that suit. the petitioner made grievance that in that written statement, the respondent made false allegations and gave bad name against the petitioner, .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Feb-06-1992
Reported in : 206ITR92(Cal)
ajit k. sengupta, j.1. in this reference under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961, at the instance of the commissioner of income-tax, west bengal-h, the tribunal has referred the following question for our opinion :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on a correct intepretation of the provisions of section 32a of the income-tax act, 1961, the tribunal was justified in law in holding that motors, electrical installations, underground cables, overhead cables and air-conditioning machines were part and parcel of the plant and machinery used for manufacturing tissue paper and in that view in allowing investment allowance on the said items of assets ?'2. shortly stated, the facts relating to the question are that the assessee in relation to assessment year 1978-79 claimed investment allowance on motors, electrical installations and underground cables, overhead cables, air-conditioning machines, tubewells and weighing machines to the correct value of rs. 1,23,62,683. the assessing officer did not allow the investment allowance on the items on the ground that the electrical machines are in the nature of additional equipment and accessories which were not used in the actual manufacturing process. the commissioner of income-tax (appeals), however, allowed the allowance holding that these items wore plant and machinery for the purpose of manufacture of tissue paper by the assessee. it was indicated that paper manufacturing is an integrated continuing .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on : Aug-26-1992
Reported in : (1993)44ITD18(Kol.)
1. these are cross appeals filed by the assessee and the department.hence they were heard together and are disposed of by a common order for the sake of convenience.2. these appeals arise out of the income-tax assessment of m/s. kesoram industries ltd., the assessee herein, which was formerly known as m/s.kesoram industries & cotton mills ltd. the assessment year is 1970-71 for which the previous year ended on 31-3-1970. these appeals arise out of the re-assessment made by the iac, assessment, range-b(c), calcutta under section 143(3)/147(a) of the income-tax act, 1961 by his order dated 8-11-1985.3. at the time of hearing of these appeals shri r.n. bajoria, the learned counsel for the assessee stated that he was not pressing grounds no. 2 and 3 of the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee.accordingly the said two grounds are rejected as not pressed.4. this leaves us with ground no. 1 wherein the assessee challenges the validity of the reopening of the assessment under section 147(a) of the act. this contention would be considered later along with the connected contention in the department's appeal against the decision of the cit (appeals) on merits.5. in the department's appeal, in ground no. 2, objection is taken to the decision of the cit (appeals) directing the assessing authority to include the amount of rs. 10,76,283 being the cost of incomplete job in the computation of capital employed for the purpose of calculating relief under section 80j of the act.6. the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Mar-06-1992
Reported in : (1992)2CALLT244(HC)
paritosh kumar mukherjee, j.1. this appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated october 11, 1991 delivered by n. k. mitra, j. of this court whereby the writ application was finally disposed of by the learned judge by directing the respondents to allow 91 persons (who affirmed supplementary affidavits and had been able to prove the authenticity of their respective titles) to be absorbed without any delay, by damodar valley corporation (hereinafter referred to as d.v.c.).2. the facts leading to the moving of the writ petition by the damodar valley displaced employees' union (hereinafter referred to as the union), and the others are set out hereinbelow.3. petitioner no. 1 the union and petitioner nos. 2 and 3, who were added as petitioners, moved this joint writ petition, inter alia, praying for writ in the nature of mandamus upon the respondents concerned, to give appointment to the 'displaced persons' not only from the 'existing approved panel in existing formation' as per office circular dated april 6, 1990, being annexure 'e' to the writ petition, but also from the added writ applicants of civil order no. 1716(w) of 1988, as per earlier directions of the hon'ble court.4. in the writ petition, petitioners referred to the relevant provisions of section 22(2)(v) of the damodar valley corporation act, 1948, wherein, it has been provided for re-settlement of the population displaced by the dams, acquisition of land for reservoirs and protection of water sheds.5. according .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on : Aug-31-1992
Reported in : (1993)44ITD215(Kol.)
1. this appeal filed by the department is directed against the order of the commissioner of income-tax (appeals) dated 7-1-1991 for the assessment year 1987-88. the only ground raised in the appeal is as under: for that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned commissioner of income-tax (appeals) erred in deleting the addition of rs. 20,90,829 made by the assessing officer under section 41(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 accepting fresh evidences produced before him which were not produced earlier before the assessing officer in violation of rule 46a(2) of the income-tax rules, 1962.2. there is a delay of 50 days in filing the appeal. the facts which give rise to the delay are as under : the order of the cit(a) was received by the cit, wb-vi, calcutta on 5-3-1991, and, therefore, the appeal to the tribunal ought to have been filed on or before 4-5-1991. the appeal was filed on 3-5-1991 originally and also was numbered by the office of the tribunal as ita no. 1427 (cal.) of 1991. on 9th may, 1991, the ito (judicial) at calcutta filed a letter with the assistant registrar of the calcutta benches of the tribunal informing him that the appeal filed on 3-5-1991 in the assessee's case may be treated as withdrawn. the appeal was posted for hearing immediately and by order dated 31-5-1991, the tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. the operative portion of the order of the tribunal is as under: the cit vide his letter dated 9-4-1991 expressed his desire not .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Mar-27-1992
Reported in : AIR1992Cal311,(1992)2CALLT230(HC),1992(2)CHN10
order1. both the writ applications were heard together and are disposed of by this judgment.2. more than 200 butchers moved the two writ petitions. their contentions are identical as well as the prayers. the petitioners are carrying on business by slaughter cows. bullock and buffaloes at the tangra slaughter house set up by the calcutta corporation. the two matters are governed by the calcutta municipal act, 1951. the petitioners have permits as required under the law and used to pay rs. 50/- for the same and the slaughtering charges for the catties. the petitioners' case is that ss. 445, 446, 451, 456 and 457 are, among others, relevant to the case. the administrator of the calcutta corporation has been made a party-respondent because the corporation was superseded in 1972. the actual grievance of the petitioners is that the corporation has been realising rs. 50/- for the grant of written permission for the right to slaughtering cows and buffaloes at the tangra slaughter house and the corporation realises slaughtering fees as follows:-- rs.7/- for each buffalo, and rs. 6/- for each cow or bullock. apart from this rs. 2/- is charged for stallage. the petitioners have pointed out to the bye-lawsunder s. 527(46) of the calcutta municipal act, 1951 to establish their case. the peti-tioners have set their claim on cls. 9 to 10 of the bye-laws. it is stated that although the bye-laws provide for the supply of adequate food and water to animals under cl. 10 thereof but the .....Tag this Judgment!