Kolkata Court November 1998 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.
Smt. Krishna Sarkar Vs. Authorises Officer, Jalpaiguri Divisional and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-13-1998
Reported in: (1999)1CALLT425(HC)
S. Banerjea, J1. In the instant revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 25th November, 1994, passed by the Additional District Judge, First Court, Jalpaiguri in Misc. Appeal No. 30 of 1992 affirming the order of the Authorised officer, Jalpaiguri District being No. 4524/15-213 dated 18th November, 1992 confiscating the vehicle of the petitioner along with the tools, forest produce seized under section 59(A) (3) of the Indian Forest Act 1927.2. At about 8.30 p.m. of 17th July, 1992 while the Range Officer, upper Tondu range along with other forest staff were patrolling along with periphery of the forest areas in Mongla Bari Basti on the fringe of Keriar Bandar forest near north Longdong, the concerned vehicle being an Ambassador car was coming towards them with head light on and as the Range Officer and other forest personnel tried to stop the car, the driver of the car fled away while the car was still running. The sai...
Estate Officer, Burn Standard Co. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Awardesh Narayan S ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-13-1998
Reported in: (1999)1CALLT444(HC)
D. B. Dutta, J.1. An, interim order staying the operation an order of Eviction, which was passed under 'section 5(1) of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (hereinafter called the said Act) and was appeailed against before the learned District Judge under section 9 of the Act, forms the subject matter of the present revlslonal application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.2. The facts and circumstances leading to that appeal may, in short, be stated as follows :--The Respondent was the General Manager (Commercial) of the petitioner Company. He was posted at Calcutta and was occupying a Flat being No. A-l, 22 Raja Santosh Road, Alipore, Calcutta-700 027 which was allottedto him by the Company. By the office order dated 16.8.1997, he was transferred to Jabbalpur from Calcutta and by a letter dated 16.9.1997 he was requested to vacate the flat by the end of the month of September 1997. Being aggrieved by the order of transfer as well as the lett...
Nagendra Ram Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-12-1998
Reported in: (1999)1CALLT327(HC)
S.B. Sinha, J.1. The petitioner in this writ application has, inter alia, prayed for issuarance of a writ of or in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to release the additional guarantee furnished by the petitioner in respect of the term loan sanctioned in favour of the respondent No. 6 and hand over the registered Sale deed with regard to Plot No. 229 appertaining to Khatlan No. 737, Tangra, J.L. No. 5, Touzl No. 1298/2833. P.S. Tlljala, measuring 8 cattahas 3 chittaks.2. The fact that the petitioner stood as a guarantor of respondent No. 6 is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner furnished an additional sucurlty. According to the petitioner, from the letters dated 2.3.94 and 8.3.94 as contained in annexures 'A' and 'B' to she writ application respectively It would appear that the respondent Bank was clearly informed that the said additional guarantee was valid for a period of one year from date. The petitioner further contends that by a letter dat...
State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. Owners and Parties Interes ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-10-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)ARBLR327(Cal)
ORDER1. This is an application by the first and second defendants inter alia for reference of all disputes which are the subject-matter of the present suit to arbitration and for stay of all further proceedings.2. Briefly the facts leading to the present application are staled hereinafter,3. The second defendant is the owner of the vessel 'M.V. Baltic Confidence' ('the said ship' for short). The third defendant is the charterer of the said ship under the Time Charter party Agreement entered into by and between it and the second defendant.4. By five several Bills of Lading all dated 26th May. 1997 the defendants agreed and undertook to carry on board the said ship 11,433,510 metric tonnes of Canadien Yellow Peas ('the said peas' for short) from the Port of Vaneourver in Canada to the Port of Calcutta in good order and condition. The plaintiff is the holder and endorsee of each of the said Bills of Lading and the owners of the said peas.5. It is the case of the plaintiff in this suit tha...
P.P. Prasad Vs. Lt. Commander and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-10-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ243
ORDERN.K. Mitra, J.1. The petitioner initially on 5th Nov. 1998 sought to move a Criminal Revision under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging, inter alia, the order dated 22-9-1998 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Andaman and Nicobar Islands at Port Blair in Revision Case No. 11 of 1998 moved against the order No. 20 dated 15-9-1998 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class (II) at Port Blair in C.R. Case No. 34 of 1995 under Section 448/323/342, I.P.C., Since 1 refused to entertain the said Criminal Revisional application on the ground that no second revision lies to this Hon'ble Court against an order of the learned Sessions Judge passed on a revisional application, on the prayer of Mr. B.K. Das, learned Advocate for the petitioner, the petition was allowed to be converted into a Criminal Revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, and I further directed that the petitioner should be allowed to challenge the ord...
Orissa Concrete and Allied Industries Limited Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-10-1998
Reported in: 1999(65)ECC863,1999(112)ELT31(Cal)
Satyabrata Sinha, J. 1. On or about 16-9-1981 a contract was entered into by and between the petitioners and the respondents for manufacture and supply of Monoblock Concrete Sleepers containing an arbitration clause which reads thus :-'Arbitration - In the event of any dispute or difference arising in connection with this contract the same shall be referred to the 'Arbitrator' to be appointed by the General Manager, South Eastern Railway, Garden Reach in terms of provision 2900 of the Indian Railway standard conditions of contract (copy attached with Railway Board's above acceptance of tender letter) and the award of the Arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties to this contract.'2. According to the petitioners, pursuant to the said agreement, they have manufactured and supplied a large number of Railway Sleepers to the respondents. By a letter dated 3-10-1991 the Railway administration informed the petitioners that the Railway Board has fixed the rate of concrete sleeper wh...
Indian Oil Corporation and ors. Vs. Shri Ujjal Chowdhury and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-06-1998
Reported in: (1999)1CALLT220(HC)
V.K. Gupta, J.1. On this reference being made to me in terms of Clause 36 of the Letters Patent, upon a difference of opinion between the two learned Judges of this court in the Division Bench hearing the Letters Patent Appeal against the Judgment of the learned single Judge dated 23 April, 1997 whereby a mandamus was issued by the learned single Judge directing the respondents not to give any effect or further effect to the impugned letler dated 6 February, 1997 cancelling the earlier letler of Intent dated 2 April, 1996. On 2nd April, 1996 the Indian OH Corporation while referring to the application of the writ peiitloner with regard to distribution of LPG Dealership in Calcutta conveyed and communicated that it was intended to offer the distributorship based on the terms and conditions contained in the said letter of Intent dated 2 April, 1996. Vide the cancellation letter dated 6 February, 1997 however this letter of Intent was cancelled. The cancellation letter reads as under :--R...
Amiya Kumar Basu Vs. Pankaj Kr. Chakraborty and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-06-1998
Reported in: (1999)1CALLT480(HC)
T. Chatterjee, J. 1. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution is directed against the order passed by a Revisional Court by which an order of the first Court, allowing an application for addition of party in a suit for partition and injunction, was set aside and the application for addition of party filed by the petitioner was rejected. Feeling aggrieved by the order of the Revisional Court, this application under Article 227 has been moved by the petitioner who made the application for addition of party in the partition suit pending before the trial court.2. Opposite parly No. 1, Shri PankaJ Kr. Chakraborly, has filed the aforesaid suit for partition and injunction against the opposite parties Nos. 2 to 12 in the Second Court of the Assistant District Judge at Alipore (South 24 Parganas). in the said partition suit, the petitioner filed an application under Order 1, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, upon the allegations that the presence of the petitioner was neces...
The State Trading Corpn. of India Ltd. Vs. K.K. Designs (P) Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-05-1998
Reported in: (1999)1CALLT413(HC)
R. Pal, J.1. The facts of the case have been narrated fully in the Judgment of my learned Brother. While concurring with the findings of my learned Brother I wish to add a few words.2. The original ex parte order obtained by the respondent is dated 28th August, 1998. It directed maintenance of status quo and made the application returnable on 1st September, 1998. The appellant was given an opportunity to apply for vacating or modifying the order upon notice to the respondent On 1st September, 1998 the appellant appeared. The order of status quo was directed to continue and directions were given for filing of affidavits.3. The grievance of the respondent before us is that the appellant did not prefer any appeal from the order dated 1st September, 1998 and instead of filing an affidavit in opposition and having the matter heard and disposed of, filed an application for vacating the interim order.4. The application of the appellant was for vacating the ad interim order. By refusing to vac...
Collector of Customs Vs. Dytron (India) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-05-1998
Reported in: 1999(108)ELT342(Cal)
Ruma Pal, J. 1. The question which arises in this appeal relates to the right of the Customs Authorities to claim payment of duty and other charges in respect of goods imported by a company which has subsequently gone into liquidation.2. The company in question is Dytron (India) Limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'company'). The application for winding up of the company was filed by East West Construction and Builders Private Limited in 1998 (O.P No. 510 of 1988). Subsequent thereto the company went into liquidation and the Official Liquidator took possession of the assets of the company. The company had, prior to its liquidation, imported certain chemicals. The chemicals were stored with the Bengal Bonded warehouse without payment of Duty. The Official Liquidator took inspection of the chemicals pursuant to an order of Court. The chemicals were valued. Valuation Report was submitted. On 7th February, 1995 and 8th February, 1995 the Official Liquidator issued advertisements for sa...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »