Kolkata Court March 2005 Judgments

Jahar Ali Mondal Vs. Md. Hazi Amir Ali

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2005(4)CHN738

Joytosh Banerjee, J. 1. The instant appeal from the appellate decree is from the judgment dated 14.6.90 and the decree thereof passed by the Additional District Judge, 1st Court, Barasat in the District of 24-Parganas (N) through which the learned Appellate Court below dismissed the appeal (T. A. No. 251 of 1988) and affirmed judgment and decree passed by Munsif, 2nd Court, Barasat in T. S. No. 480 of 1973.2. The plaintiff/respondent brought the suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction, inter alia, contending that the properties described in Schedule 'ka' to the plaint measuring 13.15 acres of land in C.S. Khatian No. 113 of Mouza Abarberia in P.S. Habra were the rayati properties of Chhepatulla Mondal, Joynal @ Joynur Bibi, Tahiran Bibi and Sarifan Bibi under the landlords Jagat Prosanna Mukhopadhaya and others. The co-sharers/tenants amicably partitioned the properties amongst themselves and pursuant to such amicable partition, were duly recorded in C.S. Khatian No. 113...

R. Piyarelall Import and Export Ltd. Vs. Bright Consumer Co-operative ...

Court: Kolkata

1. This appeal has been preferred against various orders passed in WP No. 1587 of 2003 passed by the learned Single Judge, by the appellant, not a party to the writ petition, with leave of this Court. After having heard Mr. Sen, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. Mitra and Mr. Saha learned Counsel for the respective respondents No. 12 and 13, the transporters, who are parties to the writ petition, it appears that Mr. Sen has been able to raise a fair question to be gone into so far as the appellant is concerned. Therefore, we propose to grant leave to prefer this appeal. Accordingly, leave is granted in terms of prayer (a).2. The application for stay of operation of the respective orders specified in the prayer thereto was pressed by Mr Sen and had made various submissions pointing out to various infirmities, irregularities and illegalities in the whole process in which the writ petition has been dealt with and has drawn our attention to the illegalities galore from the orders p...

Srimanta Banerjee Vs. Ashoka Das and anr.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2005(3)CHN673

Amit Talukdar, J.1. For quashing the proceedings of Case No. 792C/02 pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Howrah the present petitioner who has been arrayed along with three others in the said proceedings on the basis of a petition of complaint filed by the opposite party No. 1 has moved his application.2. Shri Sudipto Moitra, learned Senior Counsel duly assisted by Shri Subhasish Pachhal canvassed several points in support of the prayer for quashing. Shri Moitra at the very outset submitted that the petition of complaint does not make out any case whatsoever against the petitioner. According to Shri Moitra, in fact, there is no whisper of any allegation against the petitioner in the said petition of complaint; and neither any overt act has been attributed to the petitioner nor any role played by the petitioner in the Complaint has been described; as such, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate while taking cognizance on the basis of the petition of complaint and issuin...

Jaya Computers and Softwares Ltd. Vs. Retail Infotech (P.) Ltd.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: [2005]64SCL179(Cal)

ORDER1. We have heard the Learned Senior Advocates on behalf of the parties. 2. Both these appeals and the applications are taken up together by consent of the parties and are disposed of by this common dictated order.3. The appellant challenged the order passed by the Hon'ble Trial Judge on 29-6-2001 and order dated 23-11-2004.4. Mr. Mukherjee, Learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the company drew our attention to the order dated 29-6-2001 and submitted that the winding up petition was admitted by the said order by His Lordship. He further contended that in the said order dated 29-6-2001, it has been specifically stated that by virtue of a Memorandum of Understanding (hereinafter referred to as 'MOU') entered into between the parties on 13-2-2001, the appellant herein would supply software device to the company and the company in turn will pay a sum of Rs. 25 lakhs in cash and Rs. 25 lakhs by way of allotment of shares in the company. In accordance with the Schedule which wa...

Hindustan Law Book Company Vs. Ganesh Srivastav

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR2005Cal278,2005(2)CHN554

Narayan Chandra Sil, J. 1. This is to consider a revisional application arising out of an order dated 15.12.2004 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal in S.C. Case No. 51/A/2004 affirming the order dated 20.11.2003 passed by the Calcutta Unit No. 1 District Consumer Forum in C.D.F. Unit Case No. 86 of 2003.2. The facts of the case in brief are that the opposite party Sri Ganesh Srivastav filed an application under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for an order directing the petitioner to resume supply of Calcutta High Court Notes Journal, for the year of 2002 forthwith for the rest of his life and also prayed for a compensation to the tune of Rs. 50,000/-. The said application was filed before the Calcutta Unit No. 1 of the Consumer Forum. Sometime in the year 1981 a notice was published in the journal of Calcutta High Court Notes inviting life-membership for getting copies of the said journal for a lifetime on payment of a fee equivalent...

Purnima Saha and anr. Vs. United India Insurance Company Ltd. and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2007(1)CHN537

1. The appellants/claimants in the present action are the parents of a victim of a motor accident, who succumbed to injuries suffered from that accident on 23rd June, 2000. The victim was the 'khalasi', which broadly means helper in the common parlance of the transport trade. The death was caused on account of a collision between the bus, of which he was the khalasi, and a lorry.2. The appellants made a claim before the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, 4th Court, Burdwan under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the 'Act' in short) for an award of Rs. 3,00,000/- (rupees three lacs) as compensation, impleading the owners and the insurance companies of both the vehicles as opposite parties. Before the Tribunal, the death of the victim on account of accident between the two vehicles was proved, as also the insurance coverage of the vehicles. A sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- (rupees three lacs) was awarded as compensation upon considering the age of the victim, the applicable multiplier as ...

Happy Nook Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. the State of West Ben ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2005)2CALLT520(HC)

Soumitra Sen, J.1. In this application the petitioners have challenged an order dated 24th December, 2004, passed by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Society (hereinafter referred to as DRCS) whereby and whereunder the Board of Directors of the petitioner No. 1 was directed to call a special general meeting of the said Society under Clause (b) of Sub-section 1 of Section 29 of the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), within three months from the date of issue of the said order for the purpose of dissolving the Board of the said Society and to reconstitute the same. The facts of the case are as follows:The tenure of the previous Board of Directors of the respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the said Society) expired on or about 16th December 2003. Accordingly, the election process for constitution of the Board of Directors commenced on 13th of December, 2003 and which was adjourned till 20th December, 2003, when the election ...

Duncan Industries Ltd. and ors. Vs. State and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2005(4)CHN440

Amit Talukdar, J.1. For quashing the proceedings of Case No. C-2617 of 2004 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 9th Court, Alipore the petitioners hereinabove have come up before this Court. In this application they seek to retrieve themselves from the stage of the proceedings of Case No. C-2817 of 2004 whereupon on the basis of the petition of complaint filed by the opposite parties they were directed to answer the summons in respect of committing the offence punishable under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Shri Debasish Roy, learned Counsel appearing in support of the application has made three-fold submissions in support of his prayer for quashing. At the first instance Shri Roy submitted that since the Company Court has already directed payment of certain amount of money in respect of the fixed deposits of the opposite parties the strength in the petition of complaint looses its force. In this context he referred to the order passed by this Court in C.P. No. 478...

The Board of Trustees for the Port of Calcutta Vs. the Kolkata Municip ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2005)3CALLT282(HC)

Soumitra Sen, J.1. The disputes involved in the writ application relate to exercise of right in respect of a land measuring more or less 255 Sq. Mts. known as Cross Road No. 5 (New C.I.T. Road) adjoining the Strand Road, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the 'said road'). The petitioner had contended that the said road belongs to them and they are the owners thereof. Accordingly, they submit that the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) has no right to deal with the said road as their own and therefore cannot permit anyone to use the said road for parking facilities and also cannot realize parking fees in respect thereof.2. Considering the said road to be their property, the petitioner invited tenders for grant of licence for the purpose of collecting parking fees. At that juncture, the Corporation informed the petitioner by a letter dated 26th of December, 2002 that since the said road was being maintained and conserved by the Corporation and th...

Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Sunil Chandra Mazumdar and anr.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2006(4)CHN559

Amit Talukdar, J.1. Piece by piece, like a crossword puzzle, the entire sequence of events have to be restructured so as to get a clearer image of the whole-hog of the issue which ails the proceedings before the learned First Special Court, Alipore.2. An initial order No. 37 passed on 08.3.94 by the learned First Special Court discharging the opposite party set in motion a flurry of reactions and cause of action before the learned First Special Court, Alipore, before this Court as well as the Highest Court of the land. It would be profitable to chart out the entire sequence so as to get a grip on the entire issue and it would be more easier to tackle the question at hand.3. Pursuant to the said order, passed by the learned First Special Court, the Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter referred to as the CBI) moved a revisional application, being Criminal Revision No. 1749 of 1994, before a learned Single Judge before this Court. A learned Single Judge of this Court by an order d...