Kolkata Court May 2004 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.
Bhaswati Roy Pandey and ors. Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-19-2004
Reported in: (2004)3CALLT64(HC)
Aloke Chakrabarti, J.1. This writ petition was filed challenging the order dated January 8, 2003 passed by the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal dismissing the application filed by the present writ petitioners against an appellate order. The said appellate order was passed against the order of the Revenue Officer determining that the Raiyat Sm. Kalyani Pandey and the members of her family being the present applicants held 35.16 acres of land and since Raiyat had a four members family, she was entitled to a ceiling area of 17.30 acres and order of vesting was passed in respect of the balance land subject to result of the Special Leave Petition pending before the Supreme Court on the question of vires of the amendments of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act made in 1981 and 1986.2. Heard Mr. Saktinath Mukherjee, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Pulak Ranjan Mondal learned counsel for the respondents. As the decision in the present writ petition may have serious conseq...
Modern Gears Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Il and Fs Investment Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-19-2004
Reported in: [2006]129CompCas337(Cal)
Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.1. The petitioning creditor had done certain share transactions on behalf of the company under an agreement dated November 8, 2000 appearing at pages 15-16 of the winding up petition. Three bills were raised on February 8, 2001, February 12, 2001 and February 27, 2001, amounting to Rs. 1,94,342.25, Rs. 4,43,592.50 and Rs. 4,30,999.50 respectively aggregating to Rs. 10,68,934.25.2. These bills remain outstanding. The petitioning creditor on the other hand was holding a sum of Rs. 3,04,511.10 on the part of the company. As the company did not make payment of the aforesaid three bills, they adjusted the said amount of Rs. 3,04,511.10 and claimed the balance sum of Rs. 7,64,423.15. Repeated letters/reminders were given on and from April 2, 2001, till December 9, 2002. Those letters remain unreplied. The petitioning creditor served a statutory notice of demand on May 7, 2003, through their advocate which was replied to by the company on May 23, 2003, appearing at pag...
Manik Chandra Naskar Vs. Smt. Tara Debi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-18-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Cal207
Arun Kumar Mitra, J.1. This second appeal has been taken out by the defendant No. 1 appellant challenging the judgment and decree dated 30-1-1998 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, 1st Court at Alipur in Title Appeal No. 880 of 1984 affirming the judgment and order dated 21-9-1984 passed by the learned Fourth Munsif, Alipur in T.S. No. 180 of 1982.2. This appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of possession and mesne profits. The case as has been made out by the plaintiff in the plaint is inter alia as follows :1. One ekchala hut with that walls and tiled roof in the premises No. 32 Kali Temple Road, Police Station -- Bhowanipur belongs to the plaintiffs and pro forma defendants in their respective shares and the aforesaid joint property was let out to different monthly tenants in different portions. The defendant No. 1 was a monthly tenant in respect of suit premises. An ejectment suit was filed by all the landlords, owners, namely, the pro forma defendants Nos. 9 to 11 and...
iag Company Ltd. Vs. Triveni Glass Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-18-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)CHN447,2005(30)PTC140(Cal)
Asok Kumar Ganguly, J.1. The appellant is aggrieved by an order dated 11th February, 2004 passed by the learned Judge of the first Court refusing to grant injunction on its application (G. A. No. 2709 in C. S. No. 213 of 2003) filed alleging infringement of its design registered under No. 183322. The appellant's prayer for ad interim injunction was refused by another learned Judge on 18th August, 2003 and His Lordship directed the matter to be considered upon affidavits.2. In respect of its design, the appellant obtained a certificate of registration on 2th January, 2001, from the Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Mark, and the certificate is dated 28th August, 2000, and numbered 183322. Admittedly the certificate was granted under the provisions of the Designs Act, 1911 (hereinafter referred to as 'old Act') and the Designs Rule, 1933. The design was in respect of figured glass and it was stated in the certificate that the design will subsist for 5 years from the date ...
Bonbehari Roy and ors. Vs. Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-18-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Cal254,2004(4)CHN30
ORDERJayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. This is an application under Order 21, Rule 11 (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short 'the CPC), it has been filed for execution of order dated Sept. 6th passed in Writ Petition No. 2581 of 2001.2. The facts :-- The respondent (Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority) is the tenant of certain portions of the property at 3A, Auckland Place, Kolkata. The petitioners are the landlords. On Sept. 19th, 2000 the respondent agreed to refer the dispute regarding revision of rent to the competent authority in terms of circular dated August 3rd/11th, 1993 of the State Government. On the reference the First Land Acquisition Collector, Calcutta, gave the decision dated March 20th , 2001. He fixed the fair and reasonable rent at Rs. 2,83,389/- per month inclusive of all taxes and costs of repairs and maintenance, the determination was directed to be effective from Jan. 1st, 1997. The petitioners forwarded the draft copy of the agreement, but the respon...
Promod Kr. Singhania Vs. Uco Bank and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-18-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)CHN602
Soumitra Pal, J.1. In the instant writ application the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Kolkata and the order passed by the Recovery Officer, Kolkata Debt Recovery Tribunal.2. Mr. Prasanta Kr. Mukherjee, learned Advocate for the petitioner appearing along with Mr. Sunil Biswas particularly assailed the order dated 4.11.2003, passed by the Recovery Officer, being Annexure P-10 to the writ petition on merits. He has relied on a judgment Budhia Swain and Ors. v. Gopinath Deb and Ors., reported in : [1999]2SCR1189 in support of the merits of the case.3. Mr. Sabyasachi Chowdhury, learned Advocate for the respondent No. 1 appearing alongwith Mr. Soumen Das raised a preliminary objection and submitted that the writ petition is not maintainable as the writ petitioner if aggrieved by the order of the Recovery Officer ought to have availed himself of the statutory alternative remedy by preferring appeal as laid down under Section 30 of the Recovery of Deb...
Asis Kumar Mitra Vs. Pradip Dutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-18-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)CHN68
Joytosh Banerjee, J.1. The plaintiff in T. S. 1820 of 1993, Asis Kuraar Mitra filed the suit for a declaration that he is the monthly tenant under the defendants in respect of the suit room described in the schedule of the plaint. His case was that he and members of his family were inducted by the shebaits of the Debutter Estate of Lakshmi Thakurani, an idol being represented by its Shebaits Prakash Kumar Ghosh (defendant No. 2) and Late Prabhash Kumar Ghosh at a monthly rental of Rs. 50/- payable according to English clalender month. The father of the defendant No. 3 Prabhash used to collect rent from the plaintiff, who was a near relation of Prabhash. It was further alleged that the plaintiff had his own electric meter in the said premises with the consent of the shebaits. Plaintiff and the members of his family were the voters and their names are still appearing in the Electoral Rolls as the voters in that locality. It is the further case of the plaintiff that he used to pay the ren...
i.C.i. and Associated Companies' Employees' Union and Anr. Vs. State o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-18-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)CHN639
Amitava Lala, J.1. This writ petition is made by the employees' union for the purpose of getting an appropriate writ of Mandamus to restrain the right of appearance of the representatives of the Company before the learned First Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal. The moot point of the petitioner in this application is that under Section 36(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act in any proceedings before the Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal, a party to a dispute may be represented by a legal practitioner with the consent of the parties to the proceedings and with the leave of the Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal, as the case may be. There was no consent on the part of the Union in respect of the appearances of the two representatives who was authorised by one Mr. A. M. Nautiyal being the representative of the Management/Company. In further, Rule 78A(2) of the West Bengal Industrial Disputes Rules, 1958 has to be strictly followed.2. Factually one Mr. S. K. Kapoor, General...
Balaidas Dutt and ors. Vs. the Administrator General of West Bengal an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-18-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Cal69
ORDERJayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. This is an application under Section 49 of the Indian Trusts Act, 1882 read with Section 25 of the Administrators General Act, 1963. It has been filed by the shebaits and beneficiaries of the trust created by one Sagore Dutt by his last will and testament dated June 24th, 1886.2. The prayers made in the application are the following :'a) Leave be granted to Administrator General of West Bengal to lease out the property being premises Nos. 18. Elliot Road and 45, Rovd Street, both in Calcutta to respondent No. 2 on the terms as mentioned in Paragraphs 2 and 3 or at such terms at this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper.b) Ad-interim order in terms of prayer (a):c) Costs of an incidental to this application of the petitioners and also the Administrator General of West Bengal be come out of the Estate;d) Such further and/or other order or orders be made as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper.'3. One Sagore Dutt by his last will dated June 24th, 188...
Gita Mahensaria Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-17-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)CHN327
1. The matter relating to the instant writ of habeas corpus resorted to be Smt. Gita Mahensaria the wife of the detenu Sri Anil Kumar Mahensaria has been assigned to me by the Hon'ble Chief Justice on difference of opinion of the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nure Alam Chowdhury and the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arunabha Barua. The order of detention bearing No. 673/56/2002 CUS VIII dated 20th November, 2002 passed by Shri P. C. Jha, Joint Secretary to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue (COFEPOSA UNIT), New Delhi under Section 3(1) of Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (as amended) is under challenge. By the application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, registered as W.P. No. 8487(W) of 2003 Smt. Gita Mahensaria has prayed for issuance of writ of habeas corpus for setting her husband the detenu Anil Kumar Mahensaria at liberty by quashing the order of detention.2. Pursuant to the said order of detention dated 20th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »