Kolkata Court September 2005 Judgments
Baba Loknath Enterprises and anr. and Ashirbad and anr. Vs. State of W ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-30-2005
Reported in: 2006(4)CHN371
Soumitra Sen, J.1. Both the appeals have been filed against the impugned judgment dated 20th November, 2002 whereby the learned Judge has been pleased to uphold the order of the Excise Commissioner whereby the said Commissioner set aside the grant of off shop foreign liquor licence in favour of M/s. Ashirbad and directed fresh lottery to be held. The facts of the instant case are as follows.2. On 10th of August, 2000, an advertisement was published in the newspaper inviting applications for grant of off shop foreign liquor licence at a specified location namely, Chanchol, Durgabari Road, Galaxy Market Complex, District Malda. Pursuant to such advertisement both the appellants and one Maa Tara Enterprises together with other applicants submitted their applications in accordance with West Bengal Excise (Grant of Licence for the Manufacture of Liquor and Capsule Bottle and Country Spirit and Sale by Wholesale) Rules, 1998. Preliminary scrutiny of the applications were made by the Collecto...
Tag this Judgment!illa Chowdhury Vs. Shyamali Das and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-30-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)CHN41
Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, J. 1. The land of the petitioner was acquired by the State of West Bengal for construction of housing estate by the West Bengal Housing Board. The petitioner was dissatisfied with the award passed by the Collector. Therefore, she requested the Collector to make a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 before the learned Land Acquisition Judge.2. There were other references at the instances of the other owners. All the said references were registered as L. A. Case No. 3 to 35, 38 and 39 of 2001 (V).3. Shrimati Shyamali Das applied for her addition in the present reference case, inter alia, on the ground that she has been the descendant of Rani Rashmoni and she has been the administrator of the estate of Rani Rashmoni.4. Learned Additional District Judge, Fourteenth Court at Alipore, by Order No. 14 dated June 22, 2004, rejected her application for addition of party. The learned Judge, inter alia, held that the petitioner was not a person int...
Tag this Judgment!Biecco Lawrie Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-30-2005
Reported in: [2006(108)FLR255],(2006)IILLJ353Cal
D.K. Seth, J.1. In this appeal the order dated October 4, 2004 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. No. 5228(W) of 2004 has since been assailed. The learned single Judge by the said order was pleased to dismiss the writ petition on the ground that there was no patent illegality (sic) or perversity in the award passed by the learned Industrial Tribunal. The High Court is not a Court of appeal and the writ jurisdiction does not permit re-appreciation of the evidence and as such the finding of the learned Tribunal could not be interfered with,2. The main ground on which the learned Counsel for the appellant Mr. P.K. Dutta challenged the order is only on the ground of perversity. The workman appeared in person. The State was represented by Mr. Arup Das and Mr. T.K. Majumdar. In order to bring home his contention, Mr. Dutta took us to the charge sheet at page 46 of the application, which reads thus:It has been reported against you as under:On July 27, 1984 at about 1 A.M. while you we...
Tag this Judgment!Sita Ram Tewari Vs. Monoranjan Dey and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-30-2005
Reported in: IV(2006)ACC144,2006ACJ2527
P.K. Samanta and S.P. Talukdar, JJ.1. This is an appeal against the judgment and award dated 12.1.2005 passed in M.A.C. Case No. 228 of 1990 by learned M.A.C. Tribunal, Sixth Court, Alipore, 24-Parganas (South).2. The said case arose out of an application under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. It relates to an accident which took place on 13.3.1990 at about 10 a.m. The petitioner/victim was knocked down by a vehicle bearing No. WBT 359 which was being driven in a rash and negligent manner. As a result of such accident, the victim sustained severe fracture injury on his right femur. Petitioner was 40 years of age at the time of the accident. The said application claiming compensation was contested by insurance company. All the material allegations made in the application were denied by filing a written objection.3. Learned Tribunal framed as many as five issues upon the pleadings on records. Thereafter, by the impugned judgment, the learned Tribunal directed the insurance compan...
Tag this Judgment!Janani Hansda Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-29-2005
Reported in: 2007(2)CHN263
Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J.1. The legality and/or validity of the notice by which the meeting was requisitioned by the requisitionist members of Ranibandh Gram Panchayat for transacting the business on the agenda for removal of the Pradhan and Upa-Pradhan vide Annexure 'P-13' to this writ petition at page 40, is under challenge in this writ petition, at the instance of one of the members of the said Gram Panchayat.2. Mr. Malay Kumar Basu, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the petitioner, submitted before this Court that requisitioning of the meeting by the requisitionist members for transacting the business for removal of the Pradhan and Upa-Pradhan vide Annexure 'P-13' to this writ petition is illegal, as the said notice was issued in violation of the provision as contained in the third proviso to Section 12 of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973.3. By referring to Annexure 'P-l' to this writ petition, Mr. Basu pointed out that earlier, the requisitionist members of the said Cram ...
Tag this Judgment!Jatroo Oraon Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-28-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)CHN106
Debiprasad Sengupta, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 9.7.01 & 10.7.01 respectively passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jalpaiguri in Sessions Case No. 273 of 1999 thereby convicting the accused appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer R I for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default to suffer R I for a further period of two years.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that on the basis of a complaint lodged by P.W.1, namely Raj Kumar Oraon, a case was registered with Banarhat P.S. alleging commission of an offence under Section 302 IPC. In the FIR, it was alleged that on the date of incident i.e., on 19.8.97 at about 8.00 p.m., the father of the informant was murdered in front of their house by the accused Jatroo Oraon and one Tirban Oraon. At the time of incident, the accused was fully intoxicated and he picked up an old quarrel with the father of the informant and in course ...
Tag this Judgment!Akalu Paswan Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-28-2005
Reported in: 1(2006)CLT395
Debiprasad Sengupta, J.1. This appeal is directed agianst the Judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 25.9.2000 and 26.9.2000 respectively passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Siliguri in Sessions Trial No. 1 of 1998 (Sessions Case No. 35(1) of 1998} thereby convicting the accused appellant under Sections 376/302/201 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302 IPC. No separate sentence was passed for the offence under Section 376 and 201 IPC.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 9.1,98 the victim girl Sita Paswan aged, about 6 years, was playing in front, of a betel shop of Pappu Singh (P.W. 4) with her brother and at that point of time, the accused appellant came there and gave chocolate to the victim girl after purchasing the same from the shop of P.W. 4. The accused took the victim girl to his house and after committing rape on her, he murdered her. The deadbody of the victim...
Tag this Judgment!Samir Kumar Naskar Vs. Director of School Education and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-27-2005
Reported in: (2006)1CALLT134(HC),[2006(109)FLR904]
A.K. Banerjee, J.1. No litigant should suffer for the mistake on the part of the Court or his advocate. I wish to apply this doctrine to resolve the present controversy.2. The writ petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher in language group on January 2, 1984 in Kadipukur Naskar High School in the District of 24-Parganas(South). This school was upgraded on May 1, 1992 after D.L.I.T inspection. The petitioner's name appeared not only in the D.L.I.T report but also in other official documents pertaining to the concerned school. After the school was upgraded all organizing staff were recognized by the State excepting the petitioner. He approached this Court by filing C.O. No. 1425(W) of 1995. This Court directed the District Inspector to consider his representation. The District Inspector after giving personal hearing to all concerned passed a detailed reasoned order on May 8, 1995 appearing at pages 19-24 of the writ petition.3. Analysis of the speaking order of the District Inspecto...
Tag this Judgment!Sujata Ganguly and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-27-2005
Reported in: 2008(2)CHN728
1. Cases were coining before the Court every now and then that the State Transport Authority (STA) was refusing permit originating and terminating from the city of Kolkata and Howrah on the ground of pollution and congestion in the bus terminus and sometimes immediately thereafter such permits were being granted. In some cases the refusal was supported by an alleged policy decision of the Government which was also so disclosed in some cases by affidavit. Ultimately, it was found that no such policy decision was ever taken in the circumstances, this Court having faced difficult situation in deciding this question, where the State Government was taking different stands in different cases, directed the State Government to form a committee to submit a report on the two grounds on which permits were being refused, and on the basis of such report to take a policy decision as it might think fit and proper.1.1. Accordingly, a committee was appointed. The committee after going into the matters ...
Tag this Judgment!Ajay Kumar Ghosh Vs. West Bengal State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)CHN536
Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. While challenging the order of final assessment made by the assessing officer under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003, the writ petitioner has thrown a challenge to the office order No. 6093 dated December 30, 2003 issued by West Bengal State Electricity Board.2. The first question that has arisen is whether the Board was empowered by provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 to prescribe any procedure for assessment of charges payable by any one on account of unauthorized use of electricity. Advocates for the petitioner, the State Regulatory Commission, and the Board are at one that no provision of the Act empowered the Board to prescribe any procedure to be followed by the assessing officer in the assessment proceedings initiated under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003.3. While advocate for the petitioner has argued that provisions made in para 6 of the West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission (Electricity Supply Code) Regulations, 2004 wou...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »