Kolkata Court October 2002 Judgments
Montek Singh Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-08-2002
Reported in: (2003)2CALLT85(HC),2002CriLJ4617
P.K. Biswas, J. 1. In revisional application No. 1030 of 2001 applicant petitioner Montek Singh has come up before this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash the proceeding of Howrah G.R.P. Case No. 118 dated 25.04.01 under Sections 143/347/323/324/ 354/506 of the Indian Penal Code (GRPGR No. 139/2001) pending before the Court of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Howrah. 2. The aforesaid petitioner/applicant Montek Singh by filing another application in C.R.R. No. 1031 of 2001 under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has also come up seeking to quash the proceedings of Howrah G.R.P. Case No. 119 dated 25.04.2001 under Sections 147/148/ 149/323/324/506 of the Indian Penal Code pending before the Court of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Howrah. 3. Since common question of law and fact are involved in these two applications those are taken up for disposal analogously by this single order. 4. The facts leading to...
Tag this Judgment!Balmer Lawrie and Co. Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Employees' State Insurance Cor ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-08-2002
Reported in: [2003(96)FLR702],(2003)IILLJ105Cal
Amitava Lala, J.1. The petitioner company and its Managing Director filed this writ petition as far back as on August 23, 1994 challenging inter alia notice of demand for recovery of contribution under Section 45-C to Section 45-I of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (as amended) dated June 29, 1994 along with certificate case dated July 11, 1994. The amount so fixed under the certificate in the form of notice of demand to defaulter dated July 11, 1994 is Rs. 2,27,972/-. The outcome of such notice and certificate is that the petitioner company is liable to pay proportionate contribution of the Employees' State Insurance on overtime allowance.2. The petitioners' case is that 'overtime allowance' cannot be said to be 'wages' under Section 2(22) of the Employees' State, Insurance Act, 1948. If at all the 'overtime' allowance' is construed as 'wages' no retrospective effect can be given in recovering such contribution.3. Therefore the following questions are formulated for due consi...
Tag this Judgment!Kanchan Udyag Ltd. Vs. Mcdowell and Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-08-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Cal207
ORDERKalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J. 1. This is an application for the execution of the money decree for a sum of Rs. 4 crores and odd passed by the learned single Judge of this Court, though the decree on being upset by the Appeal Court, reached up to Apex Court at one stage and ultimately on remand the decree is under scrutiny again before the appeal Court. To elaborate the aforesaid position the fact is narrated shortly :-- The applicant herein, got the above decree against the defendant-judgment-debtor McDowell and Company Limited on 2nd December, 1999. Against the decree an appeal was preferred, however, as it appears from the records that there was no stay of operation of the decree of the learned trial Judge even at the admission stage. Mr. Hirak Mitra, learned Senior Advocate contends while resisting this application that decree itself is ex facie so bad that at one stage the appeal Court presided over by the Hon'ble Justice Mrs. Ruma Pal (as His Lordship then was) was pleased to sta...
Tag this Judgment!Bhagawat Chandra Gayen and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-08-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)CHN715,2003CriLJ1185
N.C. Sil, J.1. This appeal was directed against the judgment and order of conviction dated 22.8.1989 passed by Shri S.K. Das, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, First Court, Midnapore in connection with Sessions Trial Case No. XIV of Nov., 1986.2. It appears from the judgment passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge that as many as 42 accused persons faced trial of different charges before the learned trial court and out of those 42 accused persons he found accused Bhagawat Ch. Gayen and Ranu @ Ranendra Kr. Roy guilty of the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced them to imprisonment for life. The learned Judge also found the other four accused persons namely Bharat Jana, Ranjan Mondal, Basudeb Midaya and Durgapada Mondal guilty of the offence under Sections 325/149 I.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years each. The learned Judge was pleased to acquit all other accused persons.3. The prosecution case in brief is that in the morning at...
Tag this Judgment!Kanwar Deep Singh Etc. Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-08-2002
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1116
ORDERGora Chand De, J. 1. Kanwar Deep Singh, Managing Director of a Company named and styled as M/s. Tubrao Infotech and Industries Ltd., a Public Limited Company under the Companies Act, 1956, filed separate applications under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying for quashing of the F.I.R as well as investigational proceedings in all these six cases, five of which were started on the basis of private complaints and one was started by the Police suo motu, mainly on the ground that no case was made out in the F.I.R. and the allegation of cheating, breach of trust, etc. are without any basis and that there is no reason to investigate the case inasmuch as a separate complaint has been filed by the Security Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as SEBI for brevity) under Section 56(3), 63 and 68 of the Companies Act, 1956 and it is still pending before the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Calcutta. In all these cases, the opposite party/Stat...
Tag this Judgment!P. Viswanathan Vs. Dr. A.K. Burman and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-08-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ949
Kalayan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned single Judge of this Court dated 21st August 2000 rendered in Writ Petition No. 99 of 1999. By this judgment and order the learned single Judge granted part relief to the writ petitioner being the respondent No. 1 by directing the respondent No. 2 to pay a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs as compensation with liberty to realize this amount of compensation or a part thereof from the respondent No. 2, viz., the appellant herein. Further liberty has been granted to the writ petitioner/respondent No. 1 to file a suit for damages against the respondents, viz., the appellant and the respondent No. 2 herein or any other officer against whom personal acts of malice, misfeasance or malfeasance might be pleaded and proved.2. This case has chequered history which is put in a narrow compass as follows :--The respondent No. 1 at the relevant time was a registered medical practitioner and on the date of filing of th...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Sushmita Dey and ors. Vs. Smt. Sovana Dey
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-07-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Cal38
ORDERSubhro Kamal Mukherjee, J.1. This is an application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure for transfer of O. S. No. 28 of 2001 pending before the learned Additional District Judge, Fourth Court at Barasat, District : 24 Parganas (North) and for analogous trial with O. S. No. 154 of 2001 pending before the learned District Judge at Alipore. District : 24 Parganas (South).2. This application concerns the estate of one Dilip Kumar Dey. who was a Deputy Superintendent of Police under the West Bengal Police Directorate. The said Dilip Kumar Dey expired on August 20, 2000 at Kothari Medical Centre, Kolkata. The opposite party in this application, Shrimati Sovana Dey, claiming to be the first wife of the said Dilip Kumar Dey, filed an application for grant of succession certificate being Act 39 Case No. 31 of 2001. Since the petitioners in this revisional application have entered appearance in the said Act 39 Case No. 31 of 2001 and are contesting the claim of the opposite part...
Tag this Judgment!Sambhunath Bar Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-07-2002
Reported in: (2003)2CALLT389(HC)
P.K. Biswas, J.1. Through this appeal, the appellant Sambhunath Bar challenges the judgment and order dated 13th January, 1999 passed by Shri S. Banerjee, learned Additional Sessions Judge, 12th Court, Alipore in Sessions Trial No. 33(4)/1996 whereby the convict-appellant has been convicted under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to suffer S.I. for 5 months.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case as mainly emerged from the recital contained in the FIR lodged by Sri Jiban Krishna Mal, defacto-complainant is as under:That on 28th Jaistha, 1397 B.S., the eldest daughter of this defacto complainant, Jiban Krishna Mal, was given in marriage with Sri Sambhunath Bar (youngest son of Sannyashi Bar) after negotiation.3. Unfortunately, within a period of 5/6 days from the date of the aforesaid marriage, Sri Sambhunath Bar, his father Sri Sannayashi Bar, mother Smt. Jamuna Bar and his elder brother Sri ...
Tag this Judgment!Umanath Chowdhury and anr. Vs. Rahul Dutta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-07-2002
Reported in: (2003)2CALLT51(HC)
G.C. De, J. 1. By this application under Section 401 read with Section 482 of Cr.PC the present petitioners have prayed for setting aside the order dated 19.3.2002 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 6th Court, Sealdah, 24-Parganas (South) in G.R. Case No. 219 of 1995 and T.R. No. 3 of 1999. By the said order, the learned Magistrate, after full trial found both the accused persons, figured as opposite parties Nos. 1 and 2 in this case, not guilty to the charge and acquitted them under Section 248(1) CrPC. 2. All the parties appeared and contested this application. 3. It is to be noted that on the basis of a complaint filed by the present petitioners on the allegations that in the night between 5th and 6th August, 1994, the accused persons entered into a criminal conspiracy and criminally trespassed into the premises No. 22/1/1A, Raja Manindra Road and broke open the doors and windows of the said premises and took possession of the same and also committed theft in respect of some...
Tag this Judgment!Nageswar Mondal and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-07-2002
Reported in: (2003)3CALLT160(HC),2004(2)CHN59
P.K. Ray, J.1. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties.2. Challenging the Memo No. B/2351/228/94/DLC dated 30th September, 1996 issued by the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Barrackpore whereby and whereunder a decision of the Labour Commissioner, West Bengal directing the Union to take the matter of workers of the concerned mills who filed the application before the Labour Commissioner for adjudication and reference of a dispute thereto, with the State Advisory Contract Labour Board for necessary action was communicated, this writ application has been filed. In this writ application the petitioners have prayed the following reliefs:(a) A writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 3 to rescind, recall and/or set aside the purported order as mentioned in the Memo No. B/2351/228/94/DLC dated 30.9.96, being annexure 'F' to this petition, and further commanding them to refer the dispute before the Tribunal under Section 10 of the Industrial...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »