Advanced Search Results

Sri Chittaranjan Shit Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.

Court : Kolkata Appellate

Subject : Education

Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Samir Kumar Mondal; Mr Rajes Jana, Advs

1. Mr. Samir Kumar Mondal, an advocate and a member of the Bar, has requested for an adjournment on the grounds that Mr. Rajesh Jana, the advocate-on-record for the petitioner in this art.226 petition dated October...

Pramatha Kumar Maity Vs. Ashima Maity

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Family

Acts : Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 13(1)

Reported in : AIR1991Cal123,(1991)1CALLT447(HC),1991(1)CHN244,95CWN486,II(1991)DMC35

Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Tarun Kumar Chatterjee and ;Mr. Nibaran Kumar Das, Advs.

ORDERA.M. Bhattacharjee, J.1. Thesuit was rightly dismissed and the appeal therefore must follow suit or follow the suit.2. The husband-appellant sued the wife-respondent for dissolution of marriage on the ground specified in Section 13(1)(iii) of the...

Amaresh Das and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Civil

Acts : West Bengal Land Reforms Act - Section 54; ;Telegraph Act, 1985 - Section 16(3); ;Limitation Act - Section 5; ;Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227; ;Land Reforms Rules; ;Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 22

Reported in : 2007(3)CHN170

Advocate for Appellant : Nibaran Kumar Das and ;Z. Haque, Advs.

Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. This application under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the unsucessful applicants before the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal and is directed against order dated...

Gostha Behari Jana Vs. Calcutta State Transport Corporation and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950 - Sections 36, 37, 38 and 45(2)(C)(1); ;Calcutta State Transport Corporation Employees Service Regulations

Reported in : [2000(86)FLR508],(2000)ILLJ992Cal

Advocate for Appellant : Anupam Chatterjee and ;Nibaran Kumar Das, Advs.

ORDERS.B. Sinha, A.C.J.1. The sole question which arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the Special Officer (Administration) of the first respondent herein was competent to pass an order of punishment unto the appellant herein....