Kolkata Court October 2003 Judgments
Husenera Begum Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-31-2003
Reported in: (2004)2CALLT410(HC),2004(1)CHN215
Gorachand De, J.1. This criminal appeal was heard by a Division Bench of this Court consisting of Hon'ble Justice Amit Talukdar and Hon'ble Justice Arunava Barua and on 20.5.2002, two separate judgments were passed by which the Hon'ble Judges, were divided in their opinion--Hon'ble Justice Talukdar took the view that the conviction and sentence passed against the appellant/ convict is to be confirmed and the appeal is to be dismissed, whereas Hon'ble Justice Barua took the view that the appeal was to be allowed and the accused/ appellant is to be acquitted inasmuch as the prosecution hopelessly failed to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubts.2. Hence under the provisions of Section 392 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Hon'ble the Chief Justice by an order dated 27th August, 2002 was pleased to place this matter before this Court. Accordingly, the appeal was taken up for hearing. At the very outset, it is to be mentioned that as two of the Hon'ble Judges of the Be...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Parang Lama and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-31-2003
Reported in: 2004(3)CHN629
Aloke Chakraborti, J.1. This appeal arose out of a judgment of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, whereby the claimant's application under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act was allowed awarding Rs. 25,000/- and the respondent insurance company was directed to pay the amount. The insurance company preferred the present appeal against the said judgment.2. The facts relevant for the present purpose are that the victim died of a motor vehicle accident on July 27, 1992 and the claimant filed the claim application. The contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant insurance company is that the victim was travelling in the offending tractor at the time of accident which caused the death of the victim. As the victim was travelling in violation of the terms and conditions under which the tractor could not carry passenger, the insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation.3. Learned Counsel for the respondent strongly denied the contention of the appellant insurance company ...
Tag this Judgment!Ramkrishna Mission Vs. Parimal Bikash Biswas
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-31-2003
Reported in: 2004(4)CHN135
ORDEREDthat No. EOS No. 42 of 1993 (TS No. 197/1986) be and the same is decreed on contest with cost. The plaintiffs in the suit do get a decree for recovery of possession in respect of the suit premises from Parimal Bikash Biswas. Parimal Bikash Biswas is directed to vacate the suit premises within, three months from this date, failing which these plaintiffs shall be at liberty to put the decree into execution for recovery of possession.38. These plaintiffs also do get a decree for mesne profits from the date of filing of this suit from 29th August, 1986 till the recovery of possession. The quantum of such mesne profits will be ascertained in an inquiry under Order 20 Rule 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure. For the present the plaintiffs do get a decree for mesne profits for the amount for which Court-fees has been paid in this suit and the balance amount of mesne profits shall be payable to the plaintiffs on payment of additional Court-fees.39. The EOS No. 39 of 1993 (TS No. 225/1985...
Tag this Judgment!Sursati Devi Yadav and ors. Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-31-2003
Reported in: 2005ACJ2117
Aloke Chakrabarti and S.K. Gupta, JJ.1. This appeal arises out of a judgment in a proceeding under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The relevant facts are that on 20.4.1999 while one Ram Avtar Yadav was standing for supervision of the loading of stone chips, all of a sudden the offending lorry came there at a high speed without giving any signal or blowing any horn and defying all traffic rules and dashed and knocked the said victim who thereby suffered severe injuries and was declared dead when he was brought to the hospital.2. Learned Tribunal passed an award of Rs. 89,500 directing adjustment of amount earlier paid under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act.3. Mr. Banik learned Counsel appearing for the claimants-appellants first contended that the victim was having an income of Rs. 4,000 per month and in support of such contention reliance was placed on the documents produced before the learned Tribunal, said to be a copy of the return filed by the victim during his lifetime...
Tag this Judgment!Bengal Brickfields Owners' Association and Ors. Vs. State of West Beng ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-30-2003
Reported in: 2006(2)CHN577
Maharaj Sinha, J.1. In this writ application, a notification issued by the Government of West Bengal, being Memo No. 9503(16)-M & M dated 30th October, 1986, is under challenge. A copy of the said notification is the only Annexure, being marked 'A', to the writ application.2. The present writ application was, in fact, moved way back in the year 1990, to be precise, on 23rd November, 1990, when a learned Single Judge, His Lordship Justice Kalyanmoy Ganguly (as His Lordship then was), was pleased to give directions for filing affidavits in the presence of the learned Advocates for both the petitioners and the State respondents.3. His Lordship Justice Ganguly was also pleased to pass an interim order directing the respondents to allow the petitioners extracting earth on payment of usual assessed royalty. Liberty was also granted to the petitioners by the learned Judge to amend the prayer portion of the petition by adding a prayer therein. On that basis there was also an interim order in t...
Tag this Judgment!Nirmal Mistry and ors. Vs. Benoy Krishna Home Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-29-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)CHN23
Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyaya, J.1. This second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated July 19, 1999 and July 22, 1999 respectively passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 3rd Court at Alipore, 24-Parganas (South) in Title Appeal No. 439 of 1990 reversing the judgment and decree dated 14th September, 1990 and 3rd November, 1990 respectively passed by the learned Assistant District Judge, 4th Court at Alipore, 24-Parganas (South) in Title Suit No. 119 of 1989.2. The plaintiff/respondent filed the suit being Title Suit No. 119 of 1989 before the learned Assistant District Judge, 4th Court at Alipore, 24-Parganas (South) for declaration, recovery of possession and mandatory injunction against the defendants.3. The plaintiff/respondent stated in the plaint filed in connection with the aforesaid title suit that the suit property was purchased by the plaintiff from one, Smt. Reba Bhowmik by a registered Deed of Conveyance dated 20th January, 1970. According to the pl...
Tag this Judgment!Punjab National Bank Vs. Delite Properties Pvt. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-29-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Cal114
ORDERKalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. The plaintiff has taken out this application for eviction of a number of persons as mentioned in paragraph 16 of the petition from suit premises being No. 111 Park Street Calcutta, principally, on the ground these persons have taken possession in breach of the interim order of status quo and further disturbing possession of the Receiver appointed by this Court, during pendency of the suit.2. The short fact of the case is that the plaintiff Bank entered into three agreements with the defendant No. 1 for purchase of five floors namely 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th of the aforesaid premises at an agreed price on or about 22nd August 1989. At that point of time the proposed building was not constructed. So, in terms of the agreements possession and/or occupation of the respective floors were to be delivered in phase-wise and gradually. The defendant No. 1, however in breach of the said agreement failed and neglected either to give possession of the respective ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) Vs. Amit Kumar Saha and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-29-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)CHN32,2004(174)ELT158(Cal)
Altamas Kabir, J.1. This reference arises out of an application filed by the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), West Bengal, under Section 130A of the Customs Act, 1962, on which a Rule had been issued on 25th June, 2002, directing the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control), Appellate Tribunal, to draw up a Statement of Case and to refer to this Court the following questions of law:--1. Whether having regard to the evidence on record, the findings and orders of the learned Tribunal are perverse?2. Whether having regard to the state of evidence adduced by the Revenue, the learned Tribunal was justified in setting aside the order of confiscation of the currency seized from Shri Amit Kumar Saha, particularly when neither did he claim ownership thereof nor could the actual owner be identified and no one had come forward to claim ownership of the same? 2. This matter had been argued at great length when the application under Section 130A of the Customs Act was initially heard which has, in f...
Tag this Judgment!Jagmohan Jindal and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-29-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)CHN106
Pradip Kumar Biswas, J.1. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed at the instance of one Jagmohan Jindal, petitioner herein, seeking for quashing of the proceeding in compliant case C/833/1997 under Sections 132/135(a)(b)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 pending before the Court of the ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate. Alipore.2. The short facts leading to the filing of this application are as under:In or about 1984, the present petitioner was introduced to one Mr. Shah who claimed that he had a manufacturing unit for manufacturing Video Cassettes at Jamnagar under the name and style of M/s. Chinar Electronics. In course of discussion, the aforesaid Mr. Shah told that he was facing financial difficulties and requested the present petitioner to arrange for some finance in return ho also assured that petitioner would receive good returns. The petitioner made enquiries with regard to the promise made by Mr. Shah and he considered it to be profitable. The p...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Pam Developments Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-28-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)ARBLR480(Cal),2004(1)CHN407
1. This is an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the 'said Act' in short) for setting aside of the award made and published on January 25, 2002 by Mr. Satyabrata Mitra, a retired Judge of this Court.2. On April 9, 1992 the petitioner invited tenders for construction of industrial covered electrical loco-shed and allied works at Santragachi (Phases I and II). The respondent submitted its tender. The petitioner accepted the offer of the respondent by a letter dated October 19, 1992. A formal agreement was, also, entered into between the parties being contract agreement No. CPM/GRC/36/ 92 dated October 19, 1992. The said agreement, inter alia, incorporated the general conditions of contract and some additional special conditions and specifications.The arbitration clause was as under:'64(3)(a) ARBITRATION : Matters in question, dispute or difference to be arbitrated upon shall be referred for decision to:--3(a)(i) A sole Arbitrator who shall be the ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »