Kolkata Court November 2003 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.
State of West Bengal and anr. and Bishwa Mukherjee and ors. Vs. Medica ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-14-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)CHN46
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. By these two writ applications, State of West Bengal through Government of West Bengal, Health and Family Welfare Department and the Principal Secretary of such department have prayed for direction upon the respondent No. 1 not to raise untenable, unreasonable and unlawful objection to the grant of permission for setting up to two new medical colleges, one at Midnapore and the other at Kolkata and to pave the way for commencing the MBBS Course in those two colleges for academic session 2003-04. The petitioners have further prayed for declaration that permission for setting up such new medical colleges had already been given with effect from the expiry of one year from the dates of filing of the schemes in terms of section 10A, Sub-section (5) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), The petitioners have also prayed for consequential relief permitting them to admit students in those two colleges pursuant to such deemed pe...
Ranjit Kumar Bhowmik Vs. Subodh Kumar Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-14-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)CHN180
Amitava Lala, J.1. The suit was instituted for recovery of khas possession upon declaration of plaintiff's title and for permanent injunction and damages etc. Initially, the plaintiff lost the suit and an appeal was preferred. The Appellate Court was pleased to pass an order of remand. Although no order of remand is, available in the file but the same was remanded on the ground of framing the issues in connection with the adverse possession admittedly and also on the ground of limitation. From the issues as framed by the Court of first instance, I find that the Issue No. 7 is in respect of adverse possession. No issue on the ground of limitation has been specifically framed. The suit was again dismissed. The Issue No. 7 being the issue of adverse possession had been dealt with by saying that the fact of dispossession as on 10th January, 1971 had not been proved. Admittedly, no documentary evidence in respect of adverse possession had been taken note of. On scanning of oral evidence of ...
Amar Nath Sen Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-13-2003
Reported in: (2004)186CTR(Cal)686,2004(175)ELT51(Cal),[2004]265ITR362(Cal)
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J. 1. Dr. Pal, appearing for the petitioners, contends that this Ordinance is constitutionally bad, as the power of the President under Article 123 to promulgate the same is conditioned. He must be satisfied that circumstances exist which render it necessary for him to take immediate action. His satisfaction must be an objective one and is not subjective. According to him no circumstances can be said to reasonably exist for which it is incumbent upon him to take immediate action. The object of this Ordinance is to set up a Tax Tribunal purported to be under Article 323B of the Constitution of India in place of the High Court for adjudication of the disputes relating to direct and indirect taxes.2. He contends further that for the last 60 years, if not more, the High Court has been satisfactorily functioning in relation to the jurisdiction conferred upon it by the various tax statutes. This is not the subject for which an immediate result could be achieved by prom...
West Bengal Board of Secondary Education and anr., Vs. Siliguri Hindi ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-13-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)CHN571
D. K. Seth, J.1. These three appeals by consent of the parties were taken up together for hearing in view of the fact that these appeals arise out of the one and the same judgment passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 2234 (W) of 1998 on 7th April, 1998. The respective appellants had challenged the order appealed against on various grounds founded upon the same set of facts involving identical question of Jaw.1.1. The principal question that arises for our determination is as to whether the respondent Siliguri Hindi High School is a minority institution within the meaning of and protection guaranteed under Article 30 of the Constitution of India.Facts :2. The Siliguri Hindi High School was established as an Anglo Hindi English Medium School in 1935 by the Hindi speaking Marwari business community of Siliguri after this community had felt in 1934 the need to establish an Anglo Hindi English Medium School. It also appears that local several merchants' association had fo...
Mendarian Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Inspector General of Regi ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-13-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)CHN363
1. Section 4 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 as amended by the Bengal Stamp (Amendment) Act, 1922, is as follows:--'4. Several instruments used in single transaction of sale, mortgage or settlement.--(1) Where, in the case of any sale, mortgage or settlement, several instruments are employed for completing the transaction, the principal instrument only shall be chargeable with the duty prescribed in Schedule 1 or in Schedule 1A, as the case may be, for the conveyance, mortgage or settlement and each of the other instruments shall be chargeable with a duty of one rupee, if the principal instrument be chargeable with the duty prescribed in Schedule 1 or with a duty of (two rupees), if the principal instrument be chargeable with the duly (if any) prescribed for such other instrument in Schedule 1 or Schedule 1A, as the case may be.(2) The parties may determine for themselves which of the instruments so employed shall, for the purposes of Sub-section (1), be deemed to be the principal instru...
Md. Hanif, Being Dead His Widow Qurmnunessa and ors. Vs. Rozan Mian an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-13-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)CHN493
Dilip Kumar Seth, J. 1. Shorn of all details, in this appeal, the moot question that requires first consideration, is as to whether the specific performance of the agreement for sale becomes impossible of performance or not by reason of the promulgation of the Calcutta Thika Tenancy (Acquisition and Regulation) Act, 1981 (1981 Act) during the pendency of the suit. The vendor, admittedly, was a thika tenant. He agreed to sell the structure without the land to the plaintiff-respondent. The agreement having not been performed though the plaintiff was ready and willing, a suit for specific performance was instituted in 1974. Mr. Verma's client purported to have purchased a part of the property agreed to be sold subsequent to the alleged agreement between the vendor and the plaintiff. But she did not contest the suit. Her application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed in this Court has been rejected. However, Mr. Verma had addressed the Court on pure question of law...
Sisir Ghosh Vs. State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-12-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)CHN80
P.N. Sinha, J.1. This revisional application is directed against the order dated 6.8.2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 6th Court, Alipore in Sessions Trial No. 5(4) of 2001. By the impugned order learned Additional Sessions Judge directed that witnesses are to be examined afresh, and being aggrieved, the accused petitioner has preferred this revision.2. Mr. Biplab Mitra, learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner contended that observation of the learned Additional Sessions Judge that examination of 12 witnesses earlier in absence of this petitioner was not recorded under Section 299 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter called Code) is bad in law. There were two accused persons in the sessions case namely Debasish Mondal alias Dibakar Mondal and this petitioner and the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (hereinafter referred as S.D.J.M.), Alipore committed the case to the Court of Sessions along with accused Dibakar after filing the case ...
Manjuri Bera Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-12-2003
Reported in: III(2004)ACC15,2005ACJ1622,2004(2)CHN370
Dilip Kumar Seth, J.1. The short question that arises in this case as argued by Mr. Banik is that whether the expression 'legal representative' appearing in Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MV Act) includes married daughters in order to enable her to get compensation on account of death of her father irrespective of the question whether the daughter was dependant on the victim or not simply because of her being a legal representative. He had relied on various decisions with which we will be dealing with at appropriate stage.2. The learned Counsel for the respondents points out that the legal representative who are dependent on the victim are only entitled to compensation. So far as the right to get compensation either under Section 140 or under Section 166, there is no distinction except the question of establishment of liability which differs in the two kinds of cases. But it is only the dependency, which is the only determining factor on which entitlement to compensation ...
Shiv Kumar JaIn Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-11-2003
Reported in: 2004(168)ELT158(Cal)
ORDERKalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. This petition has been filed being aggrieved with the decision of the appropriate department refusing to pay interest for the amount earlier deposited and thereafter refunded in terms of the order of the CEGAT. It is an admitted position that this writ petition is not based on any statutory right, but the question of negligence on the part of the department concerned. It is settled position of the law that negligence on part of the State may be due to failure to discharge constitutional obligation or simple statutory one. The power of this Court is there to grant appropriate relief without asking the litigants to go to the Civil Court but not in all cases, but in the cases where there is no dispute as regard facts, invoking of writ jurisdiction is not inappropriate. Here the fact is required to be narrated in brief. By the first authority the petitioner was asked to pay penalty and the other duty which he did. Thereafter he took up this matter in appeal...
Monowara Bibi and ors. Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-11-2003
Reported in: 2005ACJ1348
Sadhan Kumar Gupta, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 13.12.2001 passed by the Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, 4th Court, Midnapore in M.A.C. Case No. 456 of 2001. The case of the appellants is that on 18.3.2001 at about 6.30 p.m. one Sk. Amiruddin was returning home by his motor cycle bearing No. WB 34-D 4456. At that time a truck came from the opposite direction with high speed and dashed against the said motor cycle and as a result of that he sustained severe injuries and died on the spot. The accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the said truck. As the offending truck could not be traced out, so the owner and insurer of the said vehicle could not be made parties to the present proceeding. The petitioners being the wife, children and parents of the deceased have filed an application under Section 140 of Motor Vehicles Act praying compensation to the extent of Rs. 50,000 against the opposite party New India Assurance C...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »