Kolkata Court July 2002 Judgments
The State of West Bengal and anr. Vs. Molla Amanulla and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-31-2002
Reported in: (2003)1CALLT346(HC)
D.K. Seth, J. 1. In this appeal, an award dated 21st March, 1996 passed by the Court of Arbitrator [Judge Special Court (EC Act) Durgapur appointed under Section 8 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 (1952 Act)] in L.A. Case No.1 DIA/71-72 is under challenge.2. Mr., Chandra Sekhar the learned counsel for the appellants, points out that while arriving at the valuation of the land acquired, the Court had not given any reason on the basis whereof it had arrived at a valuation of Rs. 12,000/- (Rupees twelve thousand only) per acre. He had taken us through the decision and had pointed out to the lacunae in the judgment.3. Mr. Lahiri, learned counsel for the respondents, points out from the judgment that the Court had discussed the commercial valuation or other utility of the land in detail, though it might not have discussed the valuation available on the basis of the exhibits on record. He then contends that the claimants are entitled to solatium and addit...
Tag this Judgment!Uttam Ghosh Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: (2002)3CALLT550(HC),2002(4)CHN498,2004CriLJ440
G.C. De, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 30.4.85 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 4th Court, Murshidabad in Sessions Trial No. 3 of 1985. By the said Judgment, the learned Judge found the accused Uttam Ghosh guilty under Section 307 IPC and after hearing the accused on the question of sentence under Section 235(2) Cr.PC and keeping in view the tender age and that the offence was committed on the spur of moment, sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for three months.2. The fact of this case is that on 14.10.83 at about 10/11 A.M., a few persons were playing cards in a room and few others, including the accused Uttam Ghosh, were present there. In course of playing, the victim Japen Ghosh, for which the accused Uttam Ghosh hurriedly went to his own house and came with a hansua (a paddy cutting instrument used by the villagers) in his han...
Tag this Judgment!Haran Chandra Naskar Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: (2003)1CALLT228(HC),[2003(97)FLR867]
P.K. Chattopadhyay, J.1. The workmen, Shri Haran Chandra Naskar was permanently working under the Management of M/s. Switz Foods Private Limited. The Management of the said M/s. Switz Foods Private Limited dismissed Shri. Haran Chandra Naskar (hereinafter referred to as 'the workmen') on and from 17th May 2000. The Union raised an industrial dispute on behalf of the workman.2. After failure of the conciliation proceeding, the Government of West Bengal referred the matter to the First Industrial Tribunal, Kolkata for adjudication of the issues mentioned in the order of reference dated 4th September 2001.3. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that concerned Government though made the reference but no intimation was given to the Union in this regard. It has been submitted on behalf of the Union that no notice was also received by the said Union from the learned Tribunalregarding pendency of the reference as a result whereof the said Union could not take any step in the proce...
Tag this Judgment!Dipendra Narayan Munsi Vs. West Bengal State Electricity Board and ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: (2003)1CALLT290(HC)
M.H.S. Ansari, J. 1. Petitioner has, in the instant writ application, questioned the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner by a charge sheet issued under memo dated September 9, 1998, order passed by the disciplinary authority dated November 1, 1999 and the order of the appellate authority dated May 31, 2000 being annexure P-3, P-10 and P-12 respectively. Consequential directions have been prayed for reinstating the petitioner in service and awarding of all consequential benefits.2. Petitioner was issued a charge sheet wherein as many as 7 charges had been framed against the petitioner. Along with the charge sheet, the list of documents on which the charges were proposed to be sustained as also the list of witnesses was furnished. The enquiry officer by his report annexure P-7 came to the conclusion that all the 7 charges stand proved. The disciplinary authority agreeing with the report of the enquiry officer while forwarding the report of the enquiry officer propos...
Tag this Judgment!Sibu Chowdhury Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: (2003)1CALLT452(HC)
G.C. De, J. 1. By this application under Section 397/401 read with Section 482 Cr.P C the petitioner figured as accused No. 6 has challenged the series of orders passed by the learned Judge, 3rd Special Court at Calcutta in Case No. 2 of 1974 mainly on two grounds. The first ground is that the learned Judge, after framing of charges did not give any opportunity in terms of Section 246 of the Code to the present petitioner to produce a list of witnesses for cross-examination but the P. W. 1 was produced for cross-examination. The second ground is that the matter is of 1974 and is long pending and the present petitioner is unnecessarily harassed in this long pending case, which should be dropped. 2. Mr. Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner pointing out the provisions of Sub-sections (4) and (5) of Section 246 of the Code made a forceful argument in support of his contention that after the framing of charges it is incumbent upon the Court to call for a list of the prosecution witnesses...
Tag this Judgment!Pradip Kr. Sengupta Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2345
ORDERMalay Kumar Basu, J.1. In this order it is to be considered whether the revisional application filed by the applicant, Sri Pradip Kumar Sengupta, who is the accused in G.R. 347 of 1995 of the Court of the learned S.D.J.M., Durgapur should be admitted.2. The relevant facts leading to the filing of this Revisional application may be summarised as follows. The abovementioned Criminal Case in question (G.R. 347/95) arising out of Coke Oven P.S. Case No. 31 dated 17-4-1995 was filed against the present petitioner by one Sri Indrajit Sengupta, the de facto complainant, who was the Director of Titan Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd., in which the petitioner was also another Director at the relevant point of time. The complaint was lodged on 17-4-1995 against the petitioner on the ground that he had submitted false particulars about his qualification, etc. and obtained the employment under the said company by practice of fraud.3. On the basis of this FIR, police started investigation and after th...
Tag this Judgment!West Bengal Financial Corporation and anr. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: [2003]263ITR332(Cal)
1. This is an appeal under Section 260A. The West Bengal State Financial Corporation formed under the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951, had invested in shares of various companies and the investments aggregated to Rs. 14,05,785.2. In the order of the Tribunal the names of the four companies are given.3. In the assessment year 1992-93, the assessee-corporation wrote off the above sum as a bad investment and stated that 'there is no possibility of getting any amount against the investment in the shares of the company'.4. We find from the impugned order of the Tribunal dated July 31, 2001, that the argument on behalf of the assessee was to have these shares written off like writing off bad debts.5. The Tribunal turned down the said argument stating that these investments by the financial corporation were not loans and the Tribunal further mentioned that the Corporation never treated the shares as stock-in-trade.6. The Tribunal also remarked that if the shares are sold at a lesser va...
Tag this Judgment!Mantu Malik and ors. Vs. Kamala Malik and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)CHN738
Malay Kumar Basu, J.1. This revisional application is directed against the judgment and order dated 18th December, 1995 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hooghly in Criminal Appeal No. 60 of 1991 of that court thereby dismissing the appeal and affirming the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 20th September, 1991 passed by the learned S. D. J. M, Chandannagore in G. R. Case No. 394 of 1988 of that court. This G. R. Case was filed by one Smt. Kamala Malik against the accused persons (the present petitioners) on the ground that the accused Mantu Malik having married her according to Hindu rites in Baisakh, 1394 B. S. left her in Falgoon, 1394 B. S. in her parent's house, when she got pregnant out of that wedlock, never to take her back. Thereafter, she came to know that her husband, Mantu Malik was going to marry for the second time on 11th Ashin, 1395 B. S. and then on that stipulated date she along with her father and brother went to the house of her husb...
Tag this Judgment!Maya Rani GuIn and Etc. Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)1,2003CriLJ1
M.H.S. Ansari, J.1. Present reference to this Bench has been made by an order dated January 28, 2000 passed by a Division Bench of this Court, as there was difference of opinion between the two learned Judges.2. Briefly stated, facts leading to the present reference and the questions as framed by the Division Bench, are as under :On an application under Section 438, Cr. P.C. filed by the petitioners-Maya Rani Guin and another, this High Court granted anticipatory bail on September 16, 1999 on certain conditions. It was further directed that such order of anticipatory bail would remain operative for a period of three weeks from the date of passing such order subject to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of K.L. Verma v. State, 1997 Cal Cri LR (SC) 88. It was further directed by this Court that if any application for bail was thereafter made by the petitioners before the appropriate Court under Section 437/439, Cr. P.C. the same would be disposed of by such Court in accordance...
Tag this Judgment!Sevak Ghosh Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-26-2002
Reported in: (2003)1CALLT106(HC)
D.P. Sengupta, J.1. The present revisional application has been directed against an order dated 20.5.2002 passed by the learned Judge, 1st Special Court, Birbhum at Suri in Special Court Case No. 1 of 2002 thereby framing charge against the petitioner under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code.2. From the impugned order it appears that on 20,5.2002 the aforesaid case was taken up by the learned Judge for consideration of charge. The accused was present in Court. Learned lawyer for the accused as also the learned Public Prosecutor were also present in Court. The learned Judge perused the case diary and other materials on record. The learned Judge also heard the learned advocate of the defence as also learned Public Prosecutor and then on being satisfied that there was a prima facie case against the accused person, framed charge under Section 409 IPC. Schedule of dates for recording the evidence of PWs was also fixed on and from 19.8.2002 to 26.8.2002.3. The main ground on which the afor...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »