Kolkata Court June 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.
Gangadhar Singh and ors. Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-2004
Reported in: (2004)3CALLT199(HC)
A.K. Bhattacharya, J.1. The hearing stems from an appeal preferred against the Judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 5th Court, Midnapore in S. T. Case No. XVI of January, 1993 on 25.02.1994.2. Shortly put, the Prosecution case is that over the issue of catching fish from a tank on the previous day i.e. 03.02.1992, the accused persons at the instance of one Phani Bhusan Taldi & Chittaranjan Das confined Ashim Das of village Alash and snatched away Rs.1,500/- and a Hero cycle from him on 04.02.2002. At about 3.00 p.m. on that date (04.02.1992) they being armed with arrows, bows, tangies, spears etc. abused Binode Behari Makurh, Gangadhar Ghorai, Susanta Makur, Kanailal Jana, Santosh Makur and Radhagobinda Das of village Alash filthily and attacked them resulting in death of Binode Behari Makurh and Gangadhar Ghoari on the spot due to assault and injuries of other persons who are under treatment at Midnapore Sadar Hospital and Kesh...
Anil Kumar Banerjee Vs. Indian Oil Corporation
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-2004
Reported in: 2005(3)ARBLR155(Cal),(2005)1CALLT80(HC)
Aloke Chakrabarti, J.1. The appeal and the cross objection are against the judgment and order dated 28th June, 2002 passed by a learned single Judge allowing an application under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 and thereby modifying the award only to the extent of award of costs and interest. As a dispute arose between the appellant and the respondent in respect of an agreement for execution of the work of 'earth work in excavation and sand filling at the Mourigram Terminal of IOC', the matter was referred to arbitrator whereupon an arbitration proceeding was initiated which culminated in an award dated April 10, 2000. Application was filed under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 challenging the said award whereupon a learned single Judge of this Court considered the respective submissions of the parties and ultimately modified the award by allowing the application in respect of award of interest and costs.2. Mr. Jayanta Kumar Mitra, assisted by Mr. Shibda...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. J.L. Morrison (India) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-10-2004
Reported in: (2005)196CTR(Cal)201,[2005]272ITR321(Cal)
D.K. Seth, J.1. This is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, for condonation of delay. A preliminary objection has been raised by Mr. J.P. Khaitan that the order was passed by the learned Tribunal at Bombay subject to the jurisdiction of the Bombay High Court. The assessment for the concerned previous year reached its finality in another State over which the Tribunal and the High Court of that State had jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of this court cannot be stretched to the Tribunal in another State when the matter reaches finality in the other State.2. In his usual fairness, he had submitted that so far as the assessment for the subsequent years has since been transferred to this State but the concerned assessment having reached finality in another State the transfer of the cases for assessment of the subsequent years will not entitle the assessee to challenge the order of the assessment reached finality in another State, before the High Court of this State. The...
Eastern India Edible Oil Manufacturers' Association and Anr. Vs. Union ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-09-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)CHN121,2004(178)ELT114(Cal)
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. This writ application was filed by the Eastern India Edible Oil Manufacturer's Association represented by its secretary. Subsequently, some individual manufacturers filed a separate application for being added as co-petitioners on the allegation that they are members of the petitioner No. 1 and that they have similar grievance as that of the petitioner No. 1 and consequently, they are in the same way affected by the illegal action of the respondents. Those applicants agreed to be bound by the averments made in the writ application. This Court with the consent of the original petitioners allowed their prayer and they were added as co-petitioners.2. The facts giving rise to filing of the present application may be summarized thus:a) By virtue of a treaty between India and Nepal, the Government of India, department of revenue, in exercise of power conferred under Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962, issued a notification in the public interest thereby exempting ...
Ratan Mali Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-09-2004
Reported in: 2005ACJ242
Prabir Kumar Samanta and Soumitra Sen, JJ.1. This misc. appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 24.1.2001 passed in M.A.C. Case No. 32 of 1999 by the M.A.C. Tribunal, Hooghly. By the said judgment and order, the claimant's application under Section 140 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (herein after referred to as 'the said Act') has been dismissed.2. The claimant-appellant was travelling in a private bus bearing registration No. WB 15-2612 on 19.2.1996. While the said bus was proceeding along N.H. 5, it suddenly capsized by the side of the road, as a result of which several passengers were seriously injured and some of them had died. The claimant-appellant is one of such passengers who was seriously injured. He filed the above application under Section 140 of the said Act for payment of compensation under no fault liability.3. At the trial of the proceeding, the involvement of the offending vehicle in the said accident, has been proved. It has also been proved in evidence th...
Dulal Chandra Chatterjee and ors. Vs. Moni Mohan Mukherjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-09-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)CHN563
D.K. Seth, J.1. This appeal arises out of a judgment and decree passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Fifth Court at Alipore on June 12, 1978 in Title Suit No. 54 of 1974.1.2. This suit was one for partition by the plaintiffs against defendants on the ground that the property belonged to one Pulin Behari Mukherjee, who happened to be the brother and uncle and granduncle respectively of the other plaintiffs. Pulin Behari got the property by inheritance as well as through self-acquisition. It was alleged that the properties were joint and that the defendant Nos. 1 and 2, who are the sons of the sister of Pulin Behari, threatened their right, title and interest in the property and that the other co-sharers refused to effect partition. The suit was contested by the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 whereas the other defendants supported the case of the plaintiffs but did not contest the suit though filed their written statements. The parties went to trial and adduced evidences.Question/issues to b...
Bhakti Hari Nayak and ors. Vs. Vidyawati Gupta, S.C. Agarwala (Huf) an ... Overruled
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-09-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Cal145,2005(2)CHN575
Asok Kumar Ganguly, J.1. This appeal has been filed from an order dated 2nd April, 2004 passed by the learned Judge of the First Court whereby the learned Judge disposed of all the three interlocutory applications being G.A. No. 4512 of 2002 dated 25th July, 2002, G.A. No. 3462 of 2002 dated 28th August, 2002 and G.A. No. 4513 of 2002 dated 8th October, 2002. While disposing of those applications, the learned Judge ultimately directed the respondents to restore the condition of plaintiffs' roof-top cooling towers and the western side ground floor of the suit premises as was existing on the date of institution of the suit within three weeks from date. The defendants were also restrained from interfering, in any manner, with the plaintiffs' properties in the suit premises including the properties, conditions whereof were directed to be restored in terms of the injunction order. The learned Judge also directed that the said interim order shall remain in force till the disposal of the suit...
Rani Sati Kerosene Supply Company and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-09-2004
Reported in: 2005(4)CHN264
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. By this writ application, the petitioner No. 1, an agent of S. K. Oil under the West Bengal Kerosene Control Order, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Control Order') along with its two partners have challenged a suspension-cum-show cause notice dated December 10,2003 issued by the Director of Consumer Goods, West Bengal and also a subsequent order dated January 9,2004 passed by the said Director cancelling agency-licence of the petitioner No. 1 in exercise of power conferred by paragraph 9 of the Control Order.2. Initially, the grievance of the petitioners was twofold.3. First, the Director of Consumer Goods, West Bengal, is not vested with the authority to cancel an agency-licence in the District of Purulia and it is for the District Magistrate of the District to take the appropriate decision. Secondly, even if, it is assumed for the sake of argument that the said Director has such power, the purported order dated January 9,2004 having been communicated ...
Smt. Asha Lata Debya Vs. Shri Chandi Das Bhattacharya
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-08-2004
Reported in: (2004)3CALLT585(HC)
Arun Kumar Mitra, J.1. This appeal has been preferred, challenging the Order of remand dated 23rd August 1985 and the decree dated 30th August 1985 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Second Court, Bankura in the Title Appeal No. 24 of 1984 remanding the case for retrial after setting aside the judgment and decree dated 31st January, 1984, and the 4th February, 1984 respectively passed by the learned Munsif, 1st Court, Bankura in Title Suit No. 84 of 1983.2. The case as has been made out in the plaint of Title Suit No.84 of 1983 is inter alia as follows:One Brazalal Adhurryya had 1/3rd (5 Annas 6 Gandas 2 Kara 2 Kranti) share in the tank referred to in the plaint. Said Sri Brazalal Adhurryya had two daughters, Thakomani Debi and Sarat Kumari Debi who inherited the property in equal shares that is each of them got (1/6th share each) in the tank and their names were recorded in the cadastral survey record of rights. According to the plaintiff their interest was limited inter...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›