Kolkata Court December 2005 Judgments
Khalek Shaik Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-21-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)CHN483
Arun Kumar Bhattacharya, J.1. The present revision is directed against the order dated 20.04.2000 passed by the Id. Additional Sessions Judge, 6th Court, Alipore in Criminal Motion No. 62 /99 affirming the order of conviction and sentence dated 10.05.99 passed by the Id. Judicial Magistrate 1st Court, Diamond Harbour in Case No. C.80/96 under Section 46A(e)(ii) of Bengal Excise Act.2. The miniaturized version of the prosecution is that on 17.01.96 at about 10.30 a.m. the present petitioner was apprehended on Falta Road near Fatehpur market for unlawful possession of 40 litres of i.d. liquor in a polythene jar. He was arrested and the article was seized after observing formalities followed by taking sample in a separate bottle which was forwarded to the chemical examiner. The analysis report is in the positive with the finding that the liquid contained 61.2% alcohol which is of illicit origin. The Government suffered a loss of Rs. 1400/- towards revenue.3. Four witnesses on behalf of th...
Tag this Judgment!Gurbir Kaur Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees' Provi ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-21-2005
Reported in: (2006)1CALLT566(HC),2006(1)CHN547,[2006(109)FLR818],(2006)IIILLJ98Cal
Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J.1. The determination of the petitioner's liability under Section 7A of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 for non-payment of the provident fund dues on account of employer as well as employees' share of contribution and the computation of interest thereon under Section 7Q of the Act made by the Assistant Provident Fund Commission (CC) being Annexure 'P-16' to this writ petition at page 192, are under challenge in this writ petition.2. Both the husband and the wife carry on business as security detective agency from the same premises. The wife is the petitioner in this writ petition. The wife claims that they are carrying on their respective businesses independently having different identity. The husband carries on business under the name and style of Orient Security & Detective Agency. Wife carries on business under the name and style of M/s. Oxford Security & Detective Agency. Husband started his business long back. Wife comm...
Tag this Judgment!Sankar Saha Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-21-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)CHN232
Arun Kumar Bhattacharya, J.1. The hearing stems from an application under Section 401 read with Section 482 Cr. PC filed by the petitioner praying for revision of the order being No. 61 dated 14.02.2001 passed by the Id. Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dinhata, Cooch Behar in G.R. Case No. 216 of 1997 arising out of Dinhata P.S. Case No. 200 of 1997 dated 19.07.97 under Section 406 IPC.2. A complaint was lodged under Section 406 IPC against the petitioner by one Arun Kumar Rathi inter alia alleging that his elder brother Surendra Kumar Rathi made over a sum of Rs. 2,91,000/- in cash to their employee-the present petitioner with instruction to deposit the same in three accounts of the State Bank of India, Dinhata Branch, but on 17.07.97 on enquiry they came to learn that only Rs. 91,000/- was deposited by the said employee instead of Rs. 2,91,000/- and thus he misappropriated a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/.-. On the basis of the said complaint/ Dinhata P.S. Case No. 200 of 1997 dated 19.07....
Tag this Judgment!Sk. Md. Ali and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-21-2005
Reported in: (2006)2CALLT139(HC)
Arun Kumar Bhattacharya, J.1. The hearing stems from an application filed by the petitioners praying for quashing the proceeding being B.G.R. No. 1102 of 2002 arising out of Metiabruz P.S. Case No. 37(2)02 under Sections 147/148/447/448/323/324/307/506/34 IPC pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Alipore, South 24 Parganas, as also all orders including order dated 07.05.2002 passed therein.2. The circumstances leading to the above application are that one Mumtaz Bibi lodged a complaint on 11.07.2000 in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Alipore against the present petitioner No. 1 and others viz. Ahmed All, Sk. Zinna, Sk. Jasimuddin and Marjina, daughter of petitioner No. 1, inter alia alleging that on 26.05.2000 at about 4.40 p.m. when she was busy with her household works, the accused persons abused her as also other members of the family and while her son Sk. Moinuddin protested, Sk. Ahmed All, and Sk. Zinna being armed with bamboo and wooden sticks trespassed into the 'and and assa...
Tag this Judgment!Basundhara Towers Pvt. Limited and anr. Vs. Binapani Daw and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-21-2005
Reported in: (2006)2CALLT555(HC),2006(3)CHN240
Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.1. The suit property is commonly known as Manglahat in the town of Howrah. The property originally belonged to one Pulin Chandra Dawn since deceased. In 1939 the property was leased out for a period of 50 years. Some time after Mimanis came in possession claiming to be the lessee of the said premises in question. Mimanis also claimed that there had been an oral agreement for sale of the said property by Dawn family in their favour in 1987. A fire broke out in the suit property on 9th November, 1987 and the entire structure was burnt out in such devastating fire. The State Government immediately requisitioned the property which gave rise to litigation. Ultimately the order of requisition was set aside by Court. Another spate of litigation started as to who would be entitled to take possession back from the State Government in view of striking out the order of requisition. Dawn family claimed that during this period the original lease had expired and as such they ...
Tag this Judgment!Laltu Pal and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-21-2005
Reported in: 2006(3)CHN330
Arun Kumar Bhattacharya, J.1. The hearing arises from an application under Sections 397/401 read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioners praying for quashing the FIE being No. 86 dated 03.06.2004 arising out of Airport P.S. Case No. 86 dated 03.06.2004 under Sections 147/148/149/436/427/ 379 IPC and Section 9B(ii) Indian Electricity Act pending in the Court of ld. S.D.J.M., Barrackpore.2. The circumstances leading to the above application are that one Jayanta Ghosh lodged a complaint on 03.06.2004 inter alia alleging that on 30.05.2004 over the issue of writing on wall, there was a scuffle resulting in head injury of a person who subsequently died on 02.06.2004. On receipt of the said information of death, on 03.06.2004 at about 5.15 a.m. the boys residing at Promodnagar and nearby the playground of Milan Sangha Club damaged ten houses, shops of the locality as also a motorbike, looted away articles including TV set, carom board, drum etc. of the said club and set fire to the...
Tag this Judgment!Gour Hari Kayal and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-20-2005
Reported in: 2006(3)CHN286
Soumitra Pal, J.1. The petitioner in the application has challenged the order passed in 9th September, 1997 in T.A. No. 262 of 1996 by the learned State Administrative Tribunal dismissing the prayer for quashing the order of dismissal of the petitioner from service.2. The petitioner has stated that in 1966 he was appointed as helper majdur in the Transport Department under the State. In the year 1991 while working he became seriously ill. The authorities after considering his case posted him temporarily for a period of three months at Diamond Harbour. Thereafter, he rejoined at Lake Garage. However, his health did not improve. He became a psychiatric patient. It is stated that the doctor advised him to do light job and not to undertake long journey. He prayed before the authorities for examination by a medical board. It appears that in the meantime he had obtained the loan of Rs. 51,700/- for purchasing a ready-built house on condition that he shall deposit the deed with the authoritie...
Tag this Judgment!Narayan Chandra Ghosh and anr. Vs. Biswajit Lahiri
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-19-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Cal95,2006(1)CHN401
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. This first appeal is at the instance of the plaintiffs in a suit for specific performance of contract and is directed against the judgment and decree dated 5th June, 2004 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, 2nd Court, Hooghly in Title Suit No. 108 of 2002 thereby dismissing the suit as not maintainable in view of the provision contained in Section 12(A)(1) of the West Bengal Building (Regulation of Promotion of Construction and Transfer by Promoters) Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. The appellants herein filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement of purchase of a flat executed between the plaintiffs and the defendant, a promoter, on the allegation that in spite of making full payment of the consideration money, the promoter was not handing over possession of the flat to the plaintiffs. In the said suit an alternative prayer for recovery of the consideration money paid by the plaintiffs was made in the event the prayer of sp...
Tag this Judgment!Johnson Vs. State
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-19-2005
Reported in: 2006(4)CHN870
Sadhan Kumar Gupta, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order of conviction dated 11.8.2005 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, A & N Islands, Port Blair in Sessions Case No. 29 of 2001 (Sessions Trial No. 36 of December, 2003) whereby the appellant was convicted for the offence under Sections 366 and 376 IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default to suffer R. I. for two months so far as the offence under Section 366 IPC is concerned. The accused/appellant was further sentenced to suffer R.I. for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/- in default to suffer R.I. for eight months for the offence under Section 376 IPC and both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. Being aggrieved by, and dissatisfied with, the said order of conviction the accused/appellant has preferred this appeal.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 22.11.1999 at Garacharama within P.S. Pahargaon the accus...
Tag this Judgment!Rydak Syndicate Ltd. Vs. Roshanlal Agarwal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-19-2005
Reported in: [2008]81SCL323(Cal)
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J.1. This appeal is arising out of a judgment and/ or order dated February 13,2002. The challenge thrown by the appellant that the order so passed by the hon'ble First Court is not tenable under the provisions of law inasmuch as the hon'ble First Court was pleased to admit the petition and directed to pay a sum of Rs. 4,72,732 being the principal together with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of the statutory notice till filing of the winding up petition and thereafter interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum.2. The said order dated February 13, 2002, has been challenged on the ground that the claim of the respondent could not have been adjudicated upon in a summary proceedings and further the claim was barred under the provisions of laws of limitation.3. Mr. Sabyasachi Chowdhury, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant drew our attention to the notice under Section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, and contended that bil...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »