Kolkata Court March 2005 Judgments
Kallol Guha Thakurata and anr. Vs. Biman Basu, Chairman, Left Front an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-31-2005
Reported in: (2005)2CALLT1(HC),2005(2)CHN330
Asok Kumar Ganguly, J.1. A learned Judge of this Court by a judgment and order dated 29.09.2003 (hereinafter called the said order) initiated a suo motu proceeding against D. C. (Traffic), Kolkata and others and in the said proceeding passed certain orders for controlling the holding of public meetings within certain fixed hours on weekdays and also gave certain directions in connection therewith. The occasions for passing those orders arose as the learned Judge, while coming to High Court on 24.09.2003, felt obstructed by a procession as a result of which the traffic went haywire and the car of the learned Judge got stuck in the jam.2. The correctness of the said order is not in issue in the instant proceeding. Since the said order contained several directions for controlling the holding of public meetings as also various directions on the public authorities in order to keep the streets of the Kolkata free from such meetings, obviously it touched upon matters of public interest. The s...
Tag this Judgment!Ruby General Hospital Limited and ors. Vs. Dr. Kamal Kumar Dutta and a ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-31-2005
Reported in: [2006]129CompCas1(Cal),(2006)5CompLJ546(Cal)
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J.1. This appeal and the cross-appeal arising out of an order dated October 29, 1999, passed by the Company Law Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the CLB').2. By consent of the parties both appeal and cross-appeal are taken up and are disposed of by this common judgment.3. An application was filed under Sections 397 and 398 of the said Act alleging various acts and oppression and mismanagement in the affairs of the company before the learned Company Law Board by Dr. Kamal Kumar Dutta and one Dr. Binod Prasad Sinha on the facts summarised hereunder.4. On application of the company, which was incorporated in 1991, the Department of Industrial Development, Government of India (SIA) approved NRI investment in the said company. The company took a project to establish a hospital-cum-advanced diagnostic facility at Calcutta. The cost of the project would be about Rs. 11 crores out of which the share capital would be Rs. 9 crores and Rs. 8 crores out of the said share ca...
Tag this Judgment!Westinghouse Saxby Farmer Ltd. Vs. Sunil Kumar Gupta Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-30-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Cal322,(2005)3CALLT46(HC),2005(4)CHN296
Asit Kumar Bisi, J.1. This appeal at the instance of the appellant arises out of the Judgment and decree dated 11th May, 1991 passed by Shri A.K. Chatterjee, learned Additional District Judge, 12th Court, Alipore in Title Appeal No. 47 of 1989 affirming the Judgment and decree dated 20th December, 1988 passed by Shri T. Maity, learned Munsif, (now designated as Civil Judge, Junior Division), 3rd Additional Court, Alipore, in Title Suit No. 238 of 1986 which was previously numbered as Title Suit No. 14 of 1984.2. The factual matrix leading to the instant appeal may briefly be narrated thus.3. The plaintiff has instituted the suit claiming decree for eviction of the defendant from the suit premises and recovery of possession thereof and also decree for mesne profits. As per the plaint case the plaintiff company is a tenant in respect of the suit premises being Flat No. 5 on the second floor of the building known as 'Paul Mansions' at premises No. 6, Bishop Lefroy Road, P.S. Bhowanipore. ...
Tag this Judgment!Ganesh Chandra Banerjee Vs. Francy Banerjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-30-2005
Reported in: I(2006)DMC559
Arun Kumar Bhattacharya, J.1. The hearing stems from an application filed by the petitioner praying for revision of the order dated 28.4.2004 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court, Barrackpore, 24 Parganas (N) in M. Case No. 142/1997 directing him to pay @ Rs. 1,250 p.m. each to the O.P. and her daughter.2. The circumstances leading to the above application are that in the divorce suit being MAT 19/1996 pending in the Court of learned Additional District Judge, 3rd Court, Barasat, the petitioner was directed to pay Rs. 1,600 p.m. to the O.P. and her daughter towards alimony pendente lite which was subsequently enhanced by order dated 30.5.2002 from Rs. 1,200 p.m. and Rs. 400 p.m. for the O.P. and her daughter to Rs. 1,800 p.m. and Rs. 600 p.m. respectively. The application of O.P. under Section 125, Cr. P.C., registered as M. Case No. 142/1997 was initially dismissed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court, Barrackpore by order dated 28.2.2002 which was reversed on...
Tag this Judgment!Employees' State Insurance Corporation and Ors. Vs. Duncan Gleneagles ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-29-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)CHN116,[2005(106)FLR1029],(2005)IIILLJ174Cal
D.K. Seth, J.1. The question : The short question involved in this case is as to whether a diagnostic center attached to a hospital carries on manufacturing process as defined in the Factories Act, 1948 and as such is a factory within the meaning of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (ESI Act) in order to cover the persons employed in the diagnostic center under the Employees' State Insurance Scheme.Facts :2. The Employees' State Insurance Corporation through its letter dated 23rd November, 1998 (Annexure-A to the WP) required the respondent, Duncan Gleneagles Hospital Ltd., to submit its return. By another letter dated 4th of August, 1999 (Annexure-D to the WP) the appellant issued a show-cause notice for recovery of a sum of Rs. 4,78,228/- from the respondent/writ petitioner. The respondent/writ petitioner took the defence that the ESI Act does not apply in its establishment. By an order dated 16th of February, 2000 (Annexure-J to the WP) the appellant held that the respondent/...
Tag this Judgment!Prasanta Banerjee Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-29-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)CHN168,[2006(108)FLR768]
Asok Kumar Ganguly, J.1. This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 04.09.1998 passed by a learned Judge of the Writ Court whereby the learned Judge dismissed the writ petition holding, inter alia, that the extension of probationary period of the writ petitioner depends upon the satisfaction of the employer. Detailed facts are as follows :Pursuant to an advertisement in Aajkal, a daily Bengali newspaper, for filling up the posts of trainee Inspector of General Insurance Marketing, the writ petitioner applied and he was interviewed by the employer and sent on training. On successful completion of his training, the petitioner was appointed by Oriental Insurance Company (hereinafter called 'the said Company') as a Probationary Development Officer by a provisional appointment letter dated 20.05.87. Subsequently another appointment letter was issued on 12.06.87, containing the terms of appointment. One of the terms was that the petitioner will be on probation for a period of...
Tag this Judgment!Agarwal R.K. Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-28-2005
Reported in: 2006(3)CHN610,[2005(106)FLR508],(2005)IIILLJ491Cal
S.K. Gupta, J.1. This revisional application has been filed under Sections 401 and 482 of the Cr.P.C. against the order dated November 29, 2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 4th Fast Track Court, Calcutta in Criminal Appeal No. 78 of 2003, arising out of judgment dated November 29, 2003 passed in Case No. C/73 of 2000 by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 9th Court, Calcutta.2. The case of the petitioner is that, he is one of the partners of Ralia Ram Agarwal, a partnership firm situated at Liluah within the district of Howrah having a factory at the said place of business. On January 5, 2000, a petition of complaint was filed by the E.S.I. Corporation in the Court of the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta against the said firm, the petitioner and another partner under Section 85(a) of the E.S.I. Act, 1948 on the allegation that the accused persons being the principal employers of the said firm failed to deposit the contribution for the period in betwe...
Tag this Judgment!Sri. Gobinda Ghosh and ors. Vs. Biswanath Ghosh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-28-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Cal359
Arun Kumar Mitra, J. 1. Facts : The plaintiffs were in need of money and took loan of Rs. 3,000/- by a security kobala dated 24-11-1964 and a registered Ekrarnama was also executed by the defendants on the same date stipulating the terms of reconveyance therein. Initially the plaintiffs filed a suit under Section 36 of Bengal Money Lenders Act, 1940 on 7th May, 1970. Subsequently, the plaintiffs filed an application for amendment on 1st March, 1975. The learned trial Judge dismissed the said application. The plaintiffs preferred appeal against the said rejection order and the appellate Court reversed the order.2. By virtue of an amendment the plaintiffs converted the suit into a suit for specific performance of contract and the appellate Court below accepting the amendment remanded the matter to the trial Court for fresh trial in terms of the amended prayer of the plaintiffs.3. The defendants contested the suit by filing written statement and additional written statement containing int...
Tag this Judgment!Shyamal Kr. Jana Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-28-2005
Reported in: (2005)3CALLT325(HC)
Arun Kumar Mitra, J. 1. In this writ petition the only point of law which is to be decided is:2. For the purpose of reconstitution of the Managing Committee of a School who is the authority to send a nominee of local Panchayat Samity or how the nomination can be made or the nominated name how can be sent to the School.3. Here, two persons have been nominated, admittedly one is the petitioner and the other is one Sri Ashis Baran Jana both are nominees of Nandigram II Panchayat Samity sent to Barachira P.B. High School, P.O.-Rankinipur, District-Purba Medinipur for reconstitution of the Managing Committee of the said School.4. Mr. Bhattacharjee, appearing for the petitioner submits that nomination of Ashis Baran Jana is not valid and proper inasmuch as his nomination has been sent by the Sabhapati in his personal capacity without any meeting or without any resolution.5. Mr. Bhattacharjee further submits that Panchayat Samity is a statutory body having a common seal and it can be sued in ...
Tag this Judgment!Madan Mohan Dubey Vs. State and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-28-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)CHN780
Asit Kumar Bisi, J. 1. Mr. Sanjoy Chakrabarti, learned Advocate appears for the petitioner. Mr. Swapan Kr. Mallick, learned Advocate appears for the opposite party/State. None appears on behalf of the other opposite parties. Heard Mr. Chakrabarti for the petitioner and Mr. Mallick for the opposite party/State.2. The instant revision application under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure preferred by the petitioner arises out of the order dated 29.9.2003 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 17th Court, Calcutta, in G. R. Case No. 1709 of 1994 whereby the petitioner's application under Section 306 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for tendering pardon has been rejected.3. After hearing the learned Advocates for the petitioner and the opposite party/State and considering the materials on record, I find that the petitioner, Madan Mohan Dubey, who is one of the accused in the case of G. R. Case No. 1709 of 1994 pending before the Court of the learned...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »