Kolkata Court July 1997 Judgments
Dunlop India Limited Vs. T.K. Mukhopadhyay
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-31-1997
Reported in: AIR1998Cal59
S.B. Sinha, J.1. A question as regards interpretation of Section 87(2) of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 is in question in this appeal which has arisen out of a judgment and decree passed by the learned Judge, 7th Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta in Ejectment Suit No. 1063/82.2. The defendant is the appellant. The plaintiff-respondent has filed the aforementioned suit for eviction of the defendant, who admittedly was his tenant, on the ground of his bona fide requirement. The plaintiff in paragraph 1 of the plaint stated that he had purchased a flat at Apsara Apartment from Apsara Housing Cooperative Societies Limited and became absolute owner thereof. The defendant in its written statement in paragraph 6 thereof, merely did not admit the said allegation but curiously enough the said statement was verified by the deponent of the said affidavit as true to his knowledge. Ex facie therefore, the statement made by the plaintiff to the effect that he is the owner of the...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Maya Sen Vs. Bhawani Mazumdar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-31-1997
Reported in: (1997)2CALLT301(HC)
Rabin Bhattacharyya, J.1. This appeal is directed against an order passed by the learned trial Judge on 24.2.97 in connection with the Civil Order No. 6573(W) of 1991.2. The case reveals a wrangle between the two neighbours over the construction of the premises by the Respondent No. 1 to the adjoining East of the writ petitioner's building in patent violation of the Bengal Municipal Act. It was a cry in despair by the writ petitioner when she vindicated her grievance before the municipal authority about the wanton act of her neighbour. In course of hearing before the learned trial Judge, a special officer was deputed to ascertain about the extent of violation of the impugned construction. The special officer in his turn submitted a report in course of hearing. After considering the material submission made by the rival parties, the learned trial court modified the interim order dated 27.3.91 as extended on 16.5.91, according to the respondent No. 4 to complete the plastering, flooring ...
Tag this Judgment!Eastern Paper Mills and anr. Vs. the Board for Industrial and Financia ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-29-1997
Reported in: (1997)2CALLT454(HC)
ORDER1. The appeal is treated as on today's list. There will be an order in terms of prayer (a).2. This is an appeal directed against an order of the learned single Judge of the writ court passed upon a writ application, preferred by the present appellants. The order is dated 29th November, 1996 and by the said order the learned single Judge disposed of the writ application by granting opportunity to the parties to mention before the appropriate court for expeditious disposal of an alleged execution case or for sale of the property, as proposed by the company, for the purpose of liquidating the dues of the Bank under the decree.3. The admitted position is that there was a consent decree, passed in a suit, instituted by Mr. Jayanta Banerjee's client, the Bank, against Mr. P.C. Sen's clients and in that consent decree, a Receiver was appointed for certain purposes but such consent decree, admittedly, had not been put into execution and as such there was no existence of any execution case...
Tag this Judgment!Tapan Kumar Ghosh and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-29-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ3472
ORDERDibyendu Bhusan Dutta, J.1. The instant application under Section 401 read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is for quashing the proceeding in G.R. Case No. 3913 of 1987 under Section 323/34, I.P.C. pending in the Fourth Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta.2. In December 1985, a complaint was filed before the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta against the petitioners on the allegations that they had committed offences under Section 325, of I.P.C. The ld. Magistrate directed the police to investigate into that complaint under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. According to that direction, police registered a case being Section AC/No. 4331 dated 21-12-85 under Section 325, I.P.C. and started investigation. After investigation, police submitted a report before the ld. Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate on 19-2-87 with a prayer for discharge of the accused petitioners and also for permission under Section 155(2), Cr.P.C. for submission of challan under Section 323...
Tag this Judgment!Chandra Sekhar Samanta and Etc. Etc. Vs. Commissioner, Sanchaita Inves ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-28-1997
Reported in: AIR1998Cal70
Dibyendu Bhusan Dutta, J.1. These three matters were heard analogously in view of the fact that they involve common questions of facts and law.2. These three matters arise out of objections filed against an attachment effected by the Commissioner, Sanchaita Investments, in Case No. 163 of 1992, in exercise of the powers conferred by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, by its orders dated 4-5-83 and 27-9-83, passed in Writ Petitions Nos. 638 and 757 to 800 and 1113 of 1983. By order dated 4-5-83, the Commissioner was empowered to lake charge of all the assets, documents and papers of the firm called Sanchaita Investments and of its agents, Sub-agents, transferees and benamdars. By order dated 27-9-83, the Commissioner was empowered to attach such assets and properties which, in his prima facie opinion, arc of the ownership of the firm Sanchaita Investments or of the ownershipof any of its partners, agents, Sub-agents, transferees and benamdars and also to put such assets and properties to sale i...
Tag this Judgment!Madhusudan Pal Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-27-1997
Reported in: (1998)1CALLT20(HC),I(1998)DMC616
A. B. Mukherjee, J. 1. The revislonal application has been preferred with a view to set aside the order dated 9th of December 1994 passed by the SDJM, Ghatal in G.R. Case No.214 of 1992 and also to quash the aforesaid criminal proceeding.2. The case of the petitioner ts that the aforesaid G.R. Case was started on the basis of and FIR dated 23.9.92 made by the wife of the petitioner (subsequently added as opposite party No.2 giving rise to this P.S. Case No. 60 of 1992. The complainant married opposite party No.2 the 24th day of July, 1988 according to Hindu Customs and a son was born out of the said wedlock aged about three years on the date of presentation of the revlsional application. The petitioner is a Doctor being a Cardio Thoraslc Surgeon serving in the West Bengal Health Services and residing at Calcutta. In the FIR it was alleged that the petitioner and other inmates of his house used to torture the opposite party No.2 demanding more dowry causing relationship between the part...
Tag this Judgment!Punit Beriwala Vs. Suva Sanyal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-22-1997
Reported in: AIR1998Cal44
Satya Brata Sinha, J.1. This appeal, at the instance of the plaintiff, is directed against an order dated 27th March, 1997 whereby and whereunder the said learned Judge refused to grant an order of injunction in favour of the plaintiff. The fact of the matter is as follows :2. The defendant No. 2 allegedly entered into an agreement with the defendant No. 1 who is, admittedly, the owner of the suit premises who was in possession thereof till 7th March, 1995 whereafter she had shifted to another flat. The defendant No. 2 also entered into agreements with the tenants who had been occupying the premises in question in terms whereof they had surrendered their respective tenancies. A plan for construction of a multi-storey ed building upon demolition of the old structures was also sanctioned by the Calcutta Municipal Corporation on 5th of August, 1996. Allegedly, the defendant No. 2 approached the plaintiff on 19th July, 1996 for sale of the suitpremises on representation that he was authori...
Tag this Judgment!Rajaram Shaw and Etc. Vs. State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-17-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ592
ORDERDibyendu Bhusan Dutta, J. 1. These two cases arose thus.2. On 24-4-91 at about 1 -50 hours, on Ramji Prasad ASI/RPF/LCD found one Dhanbahadur Gurung and his associates in unlawful possession of some Railway properties at pocket siding of LCD Post. Ramji Prasad succeeded in arresting only Dhanbahadur Ourung with those properties while two of his associates namely Munna Bahadur and Mohan Kumar Gurung managed to flee away. No satisfactory reply could be offered by Dhanbahadur to account for the possession of the said railway properties which were seized. On interrogation, Dhanbahadur Gurung made a revelation that he used to sell the stolen railway property to the shops-cum-godowns of one Rajaram of Lalababu Shire Road, Belur and one Arun of Tarachand Ganguly Street, Bally. On the basis of a complaint lodged by the AS1 Ramji Prasad with LCD/RPF/Post, case No. 1(4) 1991 dated 24-4-91 was registered under Section 3(a) of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966 at RPF Post L...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Shree Kumari Mundra Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-1997
Reported in: [1997]228ITR548(Cal)
Ajoy Nath Ray, J.1. The two questions which have been referred to us by reason of our order passed under Section 256(2) relate to the exemption which the lady assessee claimed in regard to the assessmnet year 1981-82 for sale of her personal effects.2. It is not in dispute that the personal effects were all silver utensils.3. It is also not in dispute that those utensils were sold by the assessee and that the total weight of those items came to about 51.5 kg. 4. The full details including challans were produced by the assessee, not at the very first level of assessment, but only ultimately before the Tribunal This again is not disputed. But that the challans were produced before the Tribunal is also not a point in dispute. In the statement of case forwarded to us by the Tribunal, they have included those challans showing the details of the items sold. 5. The questions were as follows :' (i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has misdirected itself ...
Tag this Judgment!Lee Young Sang and anr. Vs. the Board of Trustees for Port of Calcutta ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-08-1997
Reported in: (1997)2CALLT359(HC)
1. We have heard an appeal from an ad-interim order passed by an Hon'ble Single Judge on the 24th of June 1997 as modified by His Lordship's order dated 30th June 1997.2. The appeal has been heard out on the most expeditious basis because by those two orders His Lordship directed to the effect that the two appellants should not leave Calcutta unless security to the extent of Rs. 50 lakh is furnished in the case of such of those two persons.3. The only provision on the basis of which such an order of semi- arrest can be supported is contained in Order XXXVIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure which deals with an arrest before Judgment.4. That rule is preceded in the Code by Section 94 which permit the making of such an arrest.5. Both the appellants who have been arrested are foreign nationals. The authority which has obtained the arrest of these two persons is the Port of Calcutta, more accurately the Trustees for the Port of Calcutta operating under, inter alia, the Major Port Trus...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »