Kolkata Court December 2005 Judgments

Associated Indem Mechanical Private Limited and anr. Vs. West Bengal S ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR2006Cal176,(2006)3CALLT85(HC),2006(4)CHN281

V.S. Sirpurkar, C.J.1. This judgment will dispose of APO No. 348 of 2004 and APO No. 349 of 2004. These two appeals are against a common judgment dismissing two writ petitions.Factual Scenario:2. For the sake of convenience the facts are being taken from APO No. 348 of 2004, The facts in APO No. 349 of 2004 are almost the same. Those facts would be stated separately. The appellant is the lessee of West Bengal Small Scale Industrial Development Corporation Limited (hereinafter called 'Corporation' for short) in respect of industrial sheds. The case of the appellant in APO No.348 of 2004 is that three separate lease deeds were executed in respect of industrial sheds being Nos. Y-72, Y-73 and Y-76 at Baltikuri Industrial Estate, Howrah. The three lease deeds in case of the appellants are of different dates but identically worded. These leases were in respect of the above industrial sheds for 99 years with yearly fixed rent. Vide Clause 2F(i) all these lease deeds spelt out a specific liab...

Authorised Officer and Deputy Director, Buxa Tiger Reserve Vs. Harbans ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2006(4)CHN573

1. Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parties.2. In the instant case, the order dated 28th May, 2001 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Jalpaiguri in Misc. Appeal No. 21 of 1998 is under challenge whereby and whereunder the order of confiscation of the vehicle charged with an offence of committing breach of Forest Act was set aside and quashed.3. Before going into the merits of the case as raised by the parties it appears that the misc. appeal was preferred assailing the order of authorized officer and Deputy Field Director, Buxa Tiger Reserve (West), Jalpaiguri along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act as there was a delay in preferring the appeal. By the order dated 10th November, 1998 the learned District Judge aforesaid admitted the misc. appeal provisionally subject to disposal of the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act during the hearing of the misc. appeal. To resist the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Ac...

icici Bank Ltd. Vs. Garodia Vyapar Pratisthan

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2006(1)CHN164

Arun Kumar Bhattacharya, J.1. The hearing arises from an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act filed by the defendant/appellant praying for condonation of delay for 250 days in preferring the appeal against the judgment and decree dated 23.07.2004 passed by the ld. XIIth Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta in T. S. 1997/95 declaring the plaintiff/respondent as bona fide purchaser of the shares as described in Schedule 'A' to the plaint and restraining the present petitioner from transferring, assigning and/or registering the shares to any other person.2. The petitioner's contention as per above application is that despite its instruction to the ld. erstwhile Advocate to oppose the matter, he did not intimate anything regarding development of the case, and when the petitioner's officer met him he could not apprise him the order passed by the Court as the brief was misplaced. The matter was then withdrawn from him and was given to Mr. M.K. Seal, Advocate of M/s. Sandersons & ...

Alpana Mukherjee and ors. Vs. Goutam Mukherjee

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2006(1)CHN328

Arun Kumar Bhattacharya, J.1. The hearing stems from an appeal preferred by the defendants/appellants against the judgment and decree dated 31.03.2000 passed by the ld. Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Calcutta in O.C. Case No. 9 of 1997.2. A thumbnail sketch of the petitioner's case is that Rama Devi, lately a resident of premises No. 112G, Acharya Prafulla Chandra Road, P.S. Amherst Street, Calcutta - 700 009, went under forced circumstances to her sister's residence at Andul Mouri, Howrah for her security and nursing and there she fell ill and died on 08.07.95. But before her death during her stay there she duly executed her last and only Will and Testament dated 28.12.94 appointing the petitioner as executor to her said Will. The testatrix Rama Devi at the time of her death left behind her sole daughter Smt. Purnima Chatterjee, a resident of Lucknow in the State of Uttar Pradesh as sole beneficiary under the Will, Miss Anindita Mukherjee & Miss Paramita Mukherjee being the daughter...

Uma Rani Sett and ors. Vs. Dipali Rani Sett and anr.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2006(1)CHN373

Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. This first appeal is at the instance of the plaintiffs in a suit for declaration and permanent injunction and is directed against the judgment and decree dated 31st May, 2004 passed by the learned Judge, 3rd Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta in Title Suit No. 2369 of 1997 thereby dismissing the said suit.2. The plaintiffs filed the aforesaid suit for declaration that they are joint lawful owners to the extent of 5/6th share (having 1/6th undivided share each) of the total shares and securities left by one Swarup Bikash Sett, the predecessor-in-interest of the defendants and for further declaration that the defendants had no right to have those shares or securities as absolute owners thereof on the strength of the extended succession certificate granted in Act 39 in Case No. 234 of 1995 arising out of Act 39 in Case No. 227 of 1975.3. The plaintiffs further prayed for permanent injunction restraining the defendant Nos. 1 and 2, their men and agent from givin...

Super Cassettes Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2006(1)CHN630,2009(244)ELT45(Cal)

Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 130A of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and is directed against the order dated 17th January, 2001 passed by the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellant Tribunal CCEGAT') by which the said Tribunal refused to review the earlier order dated 26th May, 2000 by which the prayer for interest in terms of Section 27A of the Act was refused.2. The facts giving rise to the filing of the present proceedings may be summed up thus:'(a) On 23rd September, 1987 the present appellant imported polystyrene resin vide Bill of Entry No. 1-1599 and sought clearance of the goods under sub-heading 3903.10 of CE tariff. The Customs Authorities, however, denied the benefit and the Bill of Entry was cleared by charging countervailing duty at the rate of 40 per cent. The appellant paid the amount with protest and subsequently on 28th September, 1987 claimed refund.(b) The Customs Authorities issued show-cause notice why ref...

Sukumar Das and anr. Vs. State

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2006(1)CHN573

Pranab Kumar Deb, J.1. The appeal has been directed against the conviction and sentence under Section 302 IPC passed by the learned Judge Spl-cum-Additional District & Sessions Judge, Cooch Behar in Sessions Trial No.2(7) of 2000.2. Following recovery of a decomposed body of an elderly lady from beneath the earth, Tufanganj Police Station recorded a case under Section 302/201 IPC. The prosecution case, as reflected in the FIR was to the effect that since the whereabouts of an old lady called Khukibala Das could not be found after 29.01.95, the villagers thought that she had perhaps gone to nearby area for practising 'Kabiraji'. Meanwhile, Sukumar Das and other members of the family took away her household articles and cow to their house. Thereafter, they all started cultivating the land of Khukibala Das. Fleeting suspicion having developed, the villagers started interrogating Sukumar Das and other members of his family. They, however, could not give any plausible explanation for the di...

Subhas Chandra Das Vs. State of West Bengal

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2006(3)CHN496

P.N. Sinha, J.1. This revisional application is aimed at quashing the proceeding being G.R. Case No. 1060/1980 (T.R. Case No. 65/1990) arising out of Nakashipara Police Station (in short P.S.) Case No. 9 dated 11.4.80 under Sections 420/120B/272 of the Indian Penal Code (in short IPC) now pending in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Krishnagar, Nadia.2. Mr. Tapas Kumar Ghosh, learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the aforesaid Nakashipara P.S. Case No. 9 dated 11.4.80 under Sections 420/120B/272 of the IPC was started against this petitioner and Ors. on the basis of written complaint / First Information Report (in short FIR) lodged by one Adhir Ranjan Das, Sub-Inspector of Police attached to District Enforcement Office, Krishnagar Sadar, Nadia. After concluding investigation chargesheet was submitted under Sections 420/120B/272/511 of the IPC against the accused persons with a prayer to discharge two other accused persons namely, Anil Kumar Singha Ro...

Sarkar and Sarkar Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2006(4)CHN86

1. This appeal is directed against an order dated 28th March, 2005 when the Hon'ble First Court was pleased to set aside the award passed in favour of the appellant.2. The interesting question arose in this appeal that the appellant herein raised a dispute in connection with an agreement entered into between the State of West Bengal and the appellant. The said agreement contained an arbitration clause. The said disputes were referred before the learned arbitrator. Appellant duly filed its statement of claim before the learned arbitrator and after taking into account the facts of the case placed before the learned arbitrator, learned arbitrator published his award on 21st September, 1991. Appellant in the said application claimed interest which was pendente lite interest. It appears from the facts as also submitted before us that at that point of the time learned arbitrator refused to grant such pendente lite interest to the appellant.3. The said award was passed under the provisions of...

Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) Vs. Ritu Kumar and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. By this appeal under Section 130A of the Customs Act, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), West Bengal, Kolkata has challenged the order of the Appellate Tribunal affirming the finding of the Commissioner of Appeal holding that there was no justification for confiscation of goods belonging to the appellant and of imposing personal penalty upon the directors of the respondent company.2. The fact giving rise to the filing of this appeal may be summed up thus:(a) Acting on a specific information that huge quantity of Silk fabrics of Chinese origin had been stored at the factory-cum-godown premises of M/s. Ritika Limited, the respondent herein, the Officers of P & I Branch, West Bengal, Kolkata searched the premises in presence of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, P & I Branch, the Director of M/s. Ritika Limited and two independent witnesses. The search yielded in recovery of 2907.67 meters of silk fabrics of Chines...