Kolkata Appellate Court March 2011 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Sanchita BhattacharyA. Vs. Dr. Partha Sarathi Roy and anr.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Mar-23-2011
1. The petitioner and the opposite party no.1, both doctors by profession, are presently settled abroad. While the opposite party no.1 is engaged in the United Kingdom, the petitioner is working as a pediatrician in Oman. 2. Incidentally, one is the spouse of the other. They are, however, engaged in a bitter fight in a suit for declaration and injunction instituted by the opposite party no.1 over property rights. The learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 3rd Court at Alipore is in seisin of the suit registered as Title Suit No.11 of 2007, wherein the petitioner has set up a counter claim too. 3. The real dispute between the parties is in respect of monies standing to the credit of various joint accounts maintained by them in different banks, specifically mentioned in the schedule of the plaint as well as in the counter-claim. 4. The plaintiff/opposite party no.1 had the occasion to approach this Court by filing an application under Article 227 of the Constitution, registered as C.O. 1...
icici Bank Limited. Vs. Limtex (India) Limited.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Mar-23-2011
1. These two applications are at the instance of the defendant and are directed against the order nos.26 and 28 both dated July 19, 2010 passed by the learned Judge, Sixth Bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta in Title Suit No.2569 of 2008 and in Title Suit No.1887 of 2008 respectively thereby rejecting applications under Order 7 Rule 10 of the C.P.C. 2. Since identical questions of law are involved in the two matters, these two applications are disposed of by this common judgment. For convenience, I am discussing the case under C.O. No.2804 of 2010 first. 3. The plaintiff/opposite party herein instituted a suit for a decree of declaration that the transaction dated November 7, 2006 and the credit arrangement letter dated October 31, 2006 and its extension dated October 30, 2007 between the parties hereto are illegal, null and void and not enforceable by either party, perpetual injunction, mandatory injunction directing the defendant to credit in the plaintiffs current account with ICICI B...
Malay Kumar MisrA. Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Mar-23-2011
1. In spite of service no one appears on behalf of the respondents. 2. The writ petitioner challenged the action of the respondent authorities in not permitting him to appear in the interview for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher to be held on 6.12.2009. 3. The facts briefly stated is that the selection process was initiated in the year 2006 for filling up the post of the assistant teacher in the various primary schools set up within the district of Purulia. The writ petitioner, though eligible for such post, was not permitted to participate in the selection process as his name was not sponsored by the Employment Exchange . Challenging such action the petitioner filed a writ petition being WP No. 28825 (w)/06 in this court which was disposed of on 29.12.2006 permitting the writ petitioner to appear for the interview to be held on 31.12.2006 or any other date subsequent thereto. The said selection process could not be completed due to various proceedings pending before this c...
Adyti Ghosh Vs. Sujata Banerjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Mar-23-2011
1. The petitioner is the defendant no.2 in Title Suit No.67 of 2007, pending on the file of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 6th Court at Alipore. The suit is one for eviction of the defendants on the ground of expiry of lease by efflux of time. The suit has been valued at Rs. 61,000/-, segregated in the following manner : i) for recovery of khas possession, the suit was valued at Rs. 8400/-; ii) for mesne profit, the suit was valued at Rs. 10,500/-; and iii) for damages the suit was valued at Rs. 42,100/-.2. An application was filed by the defendant no.2/petitioner under Order VII Rule 10, Civil Procedure Code (hereafter the Code) for returning the plaint to the plaintiff/opposite party no.1 (hereafter the plaintiff) for its presentation to the Court of the lowest grade having jurisdiction to try the said suit. Before the learned trial Judge, contention was raised on behalf of the defendant no.2/petitioner that foundation of the plaintiffs claim on account of damages was lac...
Durshi Chand Agarwal. Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Mar-23-2011
1) This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal procedure 1973 ( hereinafter referred to as The Code) for quashing of the proceeding in C.G.R no. 2543 of 2009 arising out of Kalighat Police Station case no. 140 of 2009 dated 26.7.2009 under Sections 498 A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3/ 4 Dowry Prohibition Act is filed at the instance of Durshi Chand Agarwal and Raj Kumari Agarwal, the accused no. 2 and 3. 2) Megha Agarwal wife of Deepak Agarwal (accused no.1 in the case-inquestion)lodged one FIR with Kalighat Police Station against her husband Deepak Agarwal and the petitioners who happen to be her father-in-law and mother-in-law, respectively, alleging therein that her marriage with Deepak Agarwal took place on 11.7.2007 and after marriage she had been to her matrimonial house at 49, Guru Pada Haldar Road, Calcutta 700026 where she started her matrimonial life. At the time of marriage cash of Rs. 35,00000/- was given to the accused persons as Dowry....
Dibakar Kumar Sarkar Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Mar-23-2011
1. This writ petitioner has impugned an inaction on the part of the respondent no. 3 - 5 to release the arrear salary and also to pay the entire retiral benefits. 2. The brief facts are that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher in Kamardanga Free Primary School, West Dinajpur on and from the month of September 1963. The petitioner used to put his signature on the monthly return which was submitted to the Sub-Inspector of School at the end of each month. Some discrepancy arose regarding putting the signature in the third column of the monthly return below one Sri Mahiuddin who was appointed subsequently. The salary of the writ petitioner was not paid from the months between June to November, 1979, April to December, 1980 and January to December, 1981 and from January to April, 1982. It is contended by the writ petitioner that during such period he rendered his services continuously. Subsequently the writ petitioner was recommended to undergo the primary training from 3. Mar...
Smt. Parul Bala Mazumdar. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Mar-22-2011
1. This application is at the instance of the plaintiff and is directed against the order no.135 dated February 21, 2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), First Court, Burdwan in Title Suit No.55 of 1972 thereby rejecting an application dated February 21, 2008 under Order 22 Rule 4(4) of the C.P.C. 2. The short fact is that the plaintiff petitioner herein instituted a suit for declaration of title, recovery of possession and mesne profits alternatively for refund of purchase money. In that suit, there were 23 defendants. The plaintiff issued summons upon all of them. The defendants entered appearance in the suit. 3. Subsequently, the defendant nos.2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 16 and 17 did not file any written statement. They did not contest the suit. The learned Advocate appearing for those defendants intimated the Court about that position. Thereafter, that those defendants died. The plaintiff filed the said application under Order 22 Rule 4(4) of the C.P.C. By th...
Smt. Dipti Kar Vs. Inspector-In Charge, Khardah Police Station and ors ...
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Mar-22-2011
1. The petitioner in this art.226 petition dated March 9, 2011 is seeking the following principal relief: a) A Writ of and/or in the nature of mandamus be issued commanding the respondent nos. 1 to 5 and each one of them their men, agents, servants, officers and/or subordinates to submit the report of re-investigation forthwith. 2. Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in terms of an order of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore, North 24-Parganas dated July 30, 2010 (at p.73) the A.S.P., Barrackpore has not reinvestigated the case that was registered under ss.461 and 379 IPC. 3. There is no reason to proceed on the basis that in terms of the order of the Criminal Court the police officer did not take steps for reinvestigation. It has not been stated anywhere that after the order dated July 30, 2010 whereby the Court directed the investigating officer to report on December 27, 2010 the Court did not make any order in the case in which previously a report w...
Goutam Choudhury and ors. Vs. Gora Chand Nandy and ors.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Mar-22-2011
1. Ejectment Suit No.441 of 2002 was instituted by the predecessor-in-interest of the opposite parties 1 to 4 herein for eviction of the original tenant, Sri Bibhuti Bhusan Banerjee and recovery of khas possession of the suit premises. One of the grounds on which eviction of the original tenant was sought is that he had sublet the suit premises in favour of one Ramdas Choudhury (since deceased). On the death of Bibhuti Bhusan Banerjee, his legal heirs were substituted as defendants. The heirs of late Ramdas Choudhury applied for being added as defendants. Their prayer was allowed and they have been contesting the suit. 2. During progress of the suit, defendant no.1 Smt. Aruna Banerjee died on July 3, 2007 while the defendant no.2 Sri Sekhar Banerjee died on July 18, 2004. The plaintiffs, being the opposite parties 1 to 4 herein, filed an application before the trial Court under Order 1 Rule 10, Code of Civil Procedure (hereafter the Code) alleging that the interest of the defendants 1 ...
Rajib Nandy. Vs. Sohagi DuttA.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Mar-22-2011
1. This application is at the instance of the defendant and is directed against the order no.24 dated January 5, 2011 passed by the learned Judge (Junior Division), Baruipur in Title Suit No.147 of 2009 thereby rejecting an application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the C.P.C. filed by the defendant. 2. The short fact is that the plaintiff/opposite party herein instituted a suit for declaration that the marriage between the parties registered on June 18, 2009 is null and void and other consequential reliefs against the petitioner herein before the learned Judge (Junior Division), Baruipur. The defendant/petitioner herein entered appearance and he is contesting the said suit. The suit was at the stage of recording evidence and the P.W.1 was examined on three occasions. 3. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application for amendment of the written statement praying for amendment of the written statement as appearing as annexure B at page no.17. The plaintiff filed an objection to that petitio...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »