Kolkata Court March 1999 Judgments
Union of India Vs. Singh Verma and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-25-1999
Reported in: (1999)3CALLT354(HC)
R. Pal, J.1. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the dismissal of an application under sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (referred to as the Act).2. Briefly, the facts are that an agreement was entered into between the appellant and the respondents for construction in connection with bridges at Mughalsarai. The work was to have been completed by September, 1992. According to the appellant the respondent failed to complete the work in terms of the agreement and the appellant terminated the contract on 21st March 1994.3. There was an arbitration clause in the agreement and pursuant to an order passed under section 20 of the Act, the General Manager appointed Mr. S.K. Mallick and Mr. R.B. Singh as Joint Arbitrators. A statement of claim was filed by the appellant on 11th February, 1996 claiming approximately Rs.44 lakhs under 15 different heads. On 28th March 1996 a counter-statement was filed by the appellant when a meeting was held by the arbitrators.4. The arb...
Tag this Judgment!Abhoy Pradhan Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-25-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ3534
Sujit Barman Roy, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 12-11-1998 passed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Diamond Harbour, South 24 Parganas in ST. No. 1(3) of 1997 convicting the appellant under Section 376, I.P.C. and sentencing him thereunder to suffer R.I. for eight years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for further two years. Appellant was also convicted under Section 420, I.P.C. and was sentenced thereunder to suffer R.I. for six years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for further one year. Learned trial Court also directed that 75% of the fine, whenever realised, shall be paid to the victim girl Pratima Das as compensation.2. After the hearing proceeded substantially and the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant was in fact concluded, Mr. S. Moitra, learned Addl. P.P. in the middle of his argument raised an objection against hearing and disposal of ...
Tag this Judgment!Dipak Chowdhury Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-24-1999
Reported in: (1999)2CALLT361(HC)
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Alhough the appeal was initially directed against an order dated 12.9.96 passed by a learned single Judge of this court, keeping in view the subsequent event, which had been note of by another Division Bench, before us now the validity or otherwise of the order dated 13.1.97 has fallen for consideration.2. The appellant allegedly purchased 118 sal logs, which bore 'passing hammer mark' and 'sale hammer mark', in Assam and brought the same in West Bengal. All original documents in relation to the said articles was said to have been deposited with the Range Officer, Moraghat Range for the purpose of obtaining transit pass. However, the logs were seized on 22.2.96. On or about 20lh February, 1996, a notice was Issued by the Beat Officer, Khuntimary, directing the appellant to show cause as to why the said logs had been brought without any hammer mark and valid document. The said notice reads thus :--'Whereas a search conducted by the undersigned at the premises located at...
Tag this Judgment!Md. Najmol Hoque Vs. Md. Majedar Rahaman and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-24-1999
Reported in: (1999)2CALLT288(HC)
ORDERS.B. Sinha, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 20.8.98 passed by a learned single Judge of this court in W.P. No. 18372(W) of 1997.2. The fact of the matter lies in a very narrow compass.A post of Assistant Teacher in Karanjl Senior Madrasah felt vacant and in respect whereof, prior permission had been granted by the Districtinspector of Schools (S.E.) to fill up the said post. As the name of the writ petitioner/respondent was not sponsored, he filed a writ application before this court which was registered as W.P. No. 5656 (W) of 1997. S. R. Misra, J by order dated 4.4.97 disposed of the said writ application permitting the petitioner to appear at the interview subject to the verification as to whether the names of the candidates who are juniors to the petitioner had been sponsored by the Employment Exchange or not. Pursuant to the said direction, the petitioner had appeared at the interview. The petitioner was empanelled. As the said panel was not approved, the...
Tag this Judgment!Asis Kumar Samanta and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-24-1999
Reported in: (1999)2CALLT438(HC)
S.K. Tiwari, J.1. This writ application has been filed against thejudgment dated 21st April, 1997, delivered by the West Bengal State Administrative Tribunal in case No. TA 1293 of 1996.2. These 11 petitioners were recruited directly to Stale Forest Service in the month of March 1990. Respondents 4 to 19 to the original petition were promoted to the State Forest Service vide notification No. 940 dated 1.2.91. They were given retrospective seniority with effect from 31.12.90. It Is not disputed that West Bengal Forest Service was constituted with effect from 31.7.1982. West Bengal Forest Service (Condition of Service) Rules, 1982, were also brought into force on the same day. According to Rule 3 (bid. determination of seniority in the service is to be governed by West Bengal Service (Determination of Seniority) Rules, 1981. According to Rule 6(2) of West Bengal Service (Determination of Service) Rules, 1981, 'the promotee shall be enbloc senior to the direct recruits of the same year'.3...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Muktipada Maity Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-1999
Reported in: (1999)2CALLT158(HC)
S.B. Sinha. J. 1. This appeal ts directed against the order dated 18.3.98 passed by a learned single Judge of this court whereby and whereunder. inter alia, keeping in view the fact that one of the score-sheet was missing, the learned trial Judge directed: 'Let candidates who had appeared in the earlier Interview be again called for fresh Interview by the Selection Committee. In granting marks to the candidates who appear at the said Interview, the Selection Committee shall take into account the score-sheets that were seized by the Police. Let the said score sheets be handed over by the Police authorities to the Selection Committee. Such interview shall take place within a fortnight from the date of communication of this order to the Selection Committee. Upon such Interview being held as aforesaid, fresh panel shall be prepared on the basis of the successful candidates within a fortnight thereafter and the Selection Committee shall thereupon submit the said panel within a week thereaft...
Tag this Judgment!Narayan Ch. Das Vs. Madhabi Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-1999
Reported in: II(1999)DMC131
Nure Alam Chowdhury, J.1. This revisional application on behalf of the petitioner-husband is directed against the judgment and order dated 10.7.1998 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, 9th Court, Alipur in Crl. Motion No. 476 of 1997, arising out of a revisional application by the wife-opposite party herein against the judgment and order dated 26.11.1997 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24 Parganas in T.R. No. 08/97 (Crl. M. 476/97) dismissing the Misc. case on contest arising on the application under Section 125, Criminal Procedure Code by the wife opposite party praying for awarding maintenance allowance of Rs. 1,500/- per month in her favour. However, the learned Judge by the impugned judgment allowed the Criminal Motion on contest with cost of Rs. 500/- against the petitioner-husband before this Court, set aside the judgment and order of the learned A.C.J.M., Alipore and ordered that the wife do get a maintenance of Rs. 2,500/- per ...
Tag this Judgment!Bata India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-1999
Reported in: 1999(108)ELT335(Cal)
ORDERAjoy Nath Ray, J. 1. This is a writ application in regard to an order passed by the Designated Authority under Section 90(1). The date of the order is 26-2-1999 and the amount determined as payable is Rs. 14,00,82,192/-.2. As per the declaration of the writ petitioner assessee, the amount payable is Rs. 7,88,34,860/-.3. The Designated Authority has passed a reasoned order (starts from page 56) and a perusal of it shows the reason why there is difference between the computation by the assessee and the authority's computation.4. Although an appeal before the Tribunal is pending in regard to the entirety of the excise duty amount of Rs. 15,76,69,719.39, yet the Designated Authority has opined that with regard to an amount of Rs. 12.25 crore approximately 'There is virtually no appeal'.5. The Designated Authority has, therefore, taken Rs. 12 crore and odd as payable in the entirety and it has added to that sum half of Rs. 15 crore approx. minus Rs. 12 crore approx.6. The point in issu...
Tag this Judgment!Karan Singh Ninayak and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-22-1999
Reported in: (2000)1CALLT530(HC)
B. Panigrahi, J.1. By an application dated 19th February, 1999, the writ petitioner made a prayer to implead Md. All Monad, the then District Land and Land reforms Officer and A.S.O., Barasat, 24 Parganas (N) as respondent No. 8 and the Deputy Land and Land Reforms Officer, A.S.O. 24-Parganas (N) as respondent No. 9. The writ petitioners filed the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before a learned Single Judge which, eventually, appeared before a Division Bench Judge and was disposed of on 11th June, 1997. The respondents State, being aggrieved by and affected with the judgment of the Division Bench preferred a Special Leave Petition in Civil Appeal No. 8827 of 1997 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.2. The Hon'ble Supreme Court by the Judgment dated 9th November, 1998 set aside the judgment of the Division Bench and remitted the matter again to decide the same in accordance with the law without going Into the merits of the case of the respective parties. It wa...
Tag this Judgment!Indian Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. Tarak Nath Sen Gupta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-19-1999
Reported in: (1999)IILLJ291Cal
Satyabrata Sinha, J.1. This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated September 4, 1998 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court whereby and whereunder the writ application filed by the petitioner was allowed.2. The fact of the matter shortly stated is as follows:The first respondent was discharged from services by the appellant with effect from January 24, 1971 on the ground that he was absent for more than 14 consecutive days. He raised an industrial dispute which was referred to the Industrial Tribunal by the appropriate Government for adjudication on the following; -1. Whether the termination of service of Shri Tarak Nath Sengupta, Junior Assistant, Est. No. 309 was justified?2. What relief, if any is he entitled to?3. By an award dated December 21, 1993 the learned Tribunal answered the reference in favour of the management and against the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent field a writ application before this Court which was marked as C.R. No. 5070(W) of 1984. s...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »