Kolkata Court October 2002 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.
Arjun Chandra Bera Vs. Bijay Krishna Bera and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-04-2002
Reported in: (2003)1CALLT375(HC),2002(4)CHN692
S.K. Mukherjee, J. 1. This appeals directed against the judgment and decree dated March 30, 1990 passed by the learned Assistant District Judge at Tamluk in Title Appeal No. 46 of 1988 affirming those dated April 9, 1998 passed by the learned Munsif, Third Court at Tamluk in Title Suit No. 215 of 1985.2. The plaintiff/appellant instituted Title suit No. 215 of 1985 for declaration of his title upon, further, declaration that the kobala dated June 28, 1985 executed by the defendant No. 2 in favour of the defendant No. 1 was fabricated, fraudulent, antedated, illegal, invalid and without consideration. The plaintiff, also, prayed for permanent injunction to restrain the defendant No. 1 from disturbing the possession of the plaintiff over the suit land. It is contended in the plaint that the suit properties originally belonged to Bishnupada Bera, the defendant No. 2. The said Bishnupada Bera on August 12, 1985 conveyed the suit properties at a consideration of Rs. 6,000/- (Rupees six thou...
Calcutta State Transport Corporation Vs. Pradip Kumar Banerjee and ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-03-2002
Reported in: (2003)IILLJ386Cal
Jayanta Kimar Biswas, J.1. The Calcutta State Transport Corporation (in short C.S.T.C.) preferred this appeal against the judgment and order, dated November 9, 2000, passed by a learned single Judge of this Court, on the writ petition [C.O.No. 14358(W) of 1981] filed by the respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the writ-petitioner).2. The punishment of removal from service with effect from January 11, 1984, as had been imposed on the writ-petitioner in a disciplinary proceeding as well as the enquiry report, was set aside by the impugned judgment and order together with a direction for his reinstatement with arrears of salary at the rate of subsistence allowance.3. With effect from March 17,1977 service of the writ- petitioner's father, who was a starter in the C.S.T.C., was terminated on medical ground. Therefore, on compassionate grounds with effect from May 14, 1980 the writ-petitioner was appointed by the C.S.T.C in the post of bus conductor.4. Soon after his appointment the...
Badri Prasad Shaw Vs. Braithwait and Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-01-2002
Reported in: I(2004)BC135,[2003]117CompCas307(Cal)
Hrishikesh Banerji, J. 1. This Revisional Application under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against Order No. 10 dated February 24, 1997 passed by the learned Assistant District Judge, 5th Court, Alipore in Money Suit No. 18 of 1995 of his file.2. By the impugned order the learned Assistant District Judge allowed the opposite party No. 1 - Company's application for stay of further proceedings of the said Money Suit in accordance with the provisions of Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (the '1985 Act' for short). The plaintiff-petitioner instituted the above suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 3,00,000 from the opposite party No. 1 - Company. The suit was filed in the year 1992 in the Court of learned Assistant District Judge, 1st Court, Chinsurah, Hooghly claiming compensation of Rs. 3,00,000. The Opposite party No. 1 - Company filed a written statement denying the allegations made by the petitioner in the plaint of thepe...
Smt. Uma Kanoria Vs. Pradip Kumar Daga
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-01-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Cal162
ORDERKalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. In this execution application a point has been taken by the judgment debtors on the question of Jurisdiction of this Court. The mode of assistance of the claim in this application is for oral examination of the judgment debtors namely Pradip Kumar Daga, Smt. Asha Daga, Yashwant Kumar Daga and Smt. Nandini Daga under Order XXI, Rule 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the Judgment debtors are also directed to make and file their affidavit, stating the particulars of the assets of the judgment debtors. 2. Mr. Tilak Basu, learned Counsel while opposing his application contends that admittedly the notice from this department has been Issued at the address of the judgment debtors situated at 5, Merline Park, Calcutta-700 019 outside the territorial limit of the Original Civil Jurisdiction of this Court. Therefore, his contention is that in view of provision of Section 39 of the Code of Civil Procedure as amended this Court has no power to execute this decr...
Commissioner of Customs Vs. Terai Overseas Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-01-2002
Reported in: 2003LC560(Calcutta),2003(156)ELT841(Cal)
Asok Kumar Ganguly, J.1. This reference application under Section 130A of the Customs Act, 1962 [hereinafter called the said Act] has been filed by the Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai in respect of an order dated 21-6-2000 passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, Eastern Regional Bench, Calcutta [hereinafter called as CEGAT], In the said application, 8 (eight) question were framed.2. The said application came up for hearing before a Division Bench of this Court and the said Division Bench, by an order dated 17-4-2001, after hearing the learned Counsels appearing for the parties, directed the Tribunal to refer to only one question for the opinion of this Court.3. The question which was referred to by the Division Bench is as follows :'Whether the drawback is allowable more particularly in terms of Rule 13(2)(iv) of the Drawback Rules, 1995 wherein the exporters were required to submit a valid insurance certificate along with the drawback claim. A perusal of t...
Amarnath Sanganaria Vs. Sonali Bank and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-01-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Cal255
1. This application for summary judgment against the defendant No. 1 for US $ 4, 14, 228 equivalent to sum of Rs. 1,98,74,759/- in connection with the money suit in which the plaintiff has claimed following amongst other reliefs : (a) A decree for US $ 7,97,018 equivalent to Rs. 3,71,41,038 as pleaded in paragraph 35 of the plaint. (b) Decree for US $ 7,97,018 equivalent to Rs. 3,71,41,038 against the defendants Nos. 1 and 2 and/or equivalent amount in Indian Rupees as on the date of decree to be passed herein. (c) Alternatively decree against such defendant or defendants, who may be found liable to the plaintiff for such sum or sums as this Hon'ble Court may determine. (d) Interim interest and interest on judgment at the rate of 20 per cent per annum, 2. The case made out in the plaint are briefly stated hereunder : 3. Pursuant to tripartite agreement the plaintiff duly sold and/or exported three lots of consignments of capital machinery spares for textile mill manufactured in Indi...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Maya Das and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-01-2002
Reported in: II(2003)ACC497,2003ACJ980
Hrishikesh Banerji, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 28.11.1994 passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, 1st court, Suri in the district of Birbhum.2. On 12.1.92 around 12 noon the victim Bapi Das aged about 11 years met with an accident while crossing the road near Ishgara village, P.S. Khoyrasole, Birbhum. He was run over by a truck bearing registration No. WGD 1610. The victim died at the spot. Khoyrasole P.S. Case No. 2 of 1992 dated 12.1.1992 was started against the driver of the truck. On completion of investigation a charge-sheet was submitted against the accused driver under Sections 279/304-A of the Indian Penal Code.3. The opposite party owner did not contest the claim petition but New India Assurance Co. Ltd. contested the claim filing a written objection alleging, inter alia, that the truck causing the accident was not covered by any policy of insurance on the date of the accident.4. The Claims Tribunal on consideration...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›