Kolkata Court September 2005 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Amesh Mondal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2005
Reported in: IV(2006)ACC707,2006ACJ1706
P.K. Samanta and S.P. Talukdar, JJ.1. This is an appeal against the judgment and award dated 6.7.2005 passed by learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, 3rd Court in M.A.C. Case No. 1 of 2005. The backdrop of the present case may briefly be stated as follows: On 25.7.2003 at about 4.30 p.m. one Debabrata Mondal alias Debu was knocked down by a vehicle bearing No. WMH 5325. Such accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the said vehicle. As a result, the victim sustained serious injuries and succumbed to the same. He was a boy of 11 years, studying in Class V. Over such accident, the legal heirs and representatives of the victim filed an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation. The said case was resisted by the present the respondent-appellant National Insurance Co. Ltd. Learned Tribunal after taking into consideration relevant facts and materials by the impugned judgment and award directed the present appellant insurer to pay an amou...
Emloyees' Provident Fund Organization and Ors. Vs. Birlapur Vidyalaya ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2005
Reported in: 2007(1)CHN173
1. Two points were urged by Mr. Ghosh in support of the cross-appeal preferred on behalf of the employer that the authority under Section 7A and the Recovery Officer are two different entities and the one person cannot discharge the dual-function, as sought to be done in the present case. However, ultimately Mr. Ghosh, in his usual fairness, has submitted that he would not press that point. Having regard to the scheme, we are of the view that the same officer can discharge dual function and if he does so, the same would not contravene the provisions of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.2. The second point that he had urged was that the provisions of Section 2(c) and 6, read with paragraphs 29, 30, 32, 36, 36(b), 38, 40, 41 and 59 of the Employees' Provident Fund Scheme, 1952 indicates that the employee's contribution and the employer's contribution are payable only when the salary or wages are actually paid. Unless there is actual payment, there is no...
Sri Sekharsree Banerjee Vs. the Tea Board and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-23-2005
Reported in: (2006)1CALLT628(HC)
Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J.1. The validity and/or legality of the order dated 29th April, 2005 passed by the Chairman of the Tea Board, an establishment constituted under the Tea Act, 1953, being a part of annexure 'P-24' to this writ petition at page 151, is under challenge in this writ petition.2. The promotion which was given to the petitioner to the post of Senior Accounts Officer was withdrawn by the said order, resulting reversion of the petitioner to the post of Accounts Officer. Simultaneously Mr. Biswas, the respondent No. 7, was promoted to the said post on account of his seniority.3. The erroneous fixation of seniority of the petitioner and the private respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 amongst other employees in the same cadre of Accounts Officer vide seniority list published on 17th April 2003, has also been challenged by the petitioner in this writ petition.4. A declaration has also been sought for in this writ petition for declaring that the Judgment and/or order passed in W.P.No...
MafijuddIn Sheikh Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-23-2005
Reported in: 2007(4)CHN654
Sadhan Kumar Gupta, J.1. The appeal has been preferred by the accused/appellant who faced the trial for the alleged commission of offence under Section 376/417, IPC. After trial, the learned Sessions Judge was pleased to hold the accused guilty for the offence under Section 376, IPC and convicted and sentenced him to suffer R.I. for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 7,000/- in default further R.I. for seven months. However, he acquitted the appellant so far as the offence under Section 417 is concerned. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said order of conviction, the appellant has preferred this appeal on the ground that the learned Sessions Judge was not at all justified in convicting the appellant for the offence under Section 376 IPC and it has been specifically claimed by the appellant that the learned Sessions Judge failed to appreciate the evidence properly and ignored the glaring discrepancies that were there in the evidence on the side of the prosecution. As such, the...
Mc Leod and Co. Ltd. Vs. State Bank of India
Court: DRAT Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-22-2005
Reported in: 3(2006)BC180
1. The matters for the present relate to an application under Section 21 of the RDDBFI Act, 1993, for waiver of pre-deposit of 75% of the amount by the appellant in filing the appeal and another application for stay of recovery proceedings being R.P. No. 41/2001, arising out of Original Application No. 209 of 1996.2. There was a settlement or compromise arrived at by and between the parties for a sum of Rs. 1, 97, 59, 566, 86, out of which, the petitioner states, a sum of Rs. 96, 97, 392/- being nearly 49% of the said settled amount has already been paid and duly accepted towards pro tanto satisfaction of the settlement by the Bank without any objection.3. That settlement or compromise was, however, done at the stage of execution i.e. at the stage of recovery proceeding before the Recovery Officer pursuant to the order of the D.R.T. and issuance of certificate in favour of the Bank (respondent No. 1) and against the defendants including defendant No. 1 i.e. appellant, Mc Leod & Co...
Sujato Bhadra Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)CHN601,2005CriLJ368
Dilip Kumar Seth, J. 1. I have the privilege of going through the judgment prepared by His Lordship the Hon'ble Alok Kumar Basu, J. I fully concur with the view and the reasoning given therein. However, I would like to add a few words of mine in support of the judgment prepared by His Lordship.2. Before we embark upon deciding the question whether the book 'Dwikhandita' written by Taslima Nasreen of Bangladesh could be proscribed in India, we may note some of the relevant facts, which require attention for the purpose of answering the question. These are: (1) that the book 'Dwikhandita' is the third volume of the autobiographical trilogy of the author; (2) that she, herself a woman, had written the alleged offending part in the context of the status of women in the society in Bangladesh emanating from adoption of Islam as a State religion; (3) that she was expressing her own view and political thoughts/philosophy in relation to the Constitution of Bangladesh of which secularism was one...
Tanushree Ghosh Vs. a and N Administration and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-22-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)CHN18
Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay, J.1. In this appeal this Court is called upon to interpret the rules relating to the benefit of reservation provided for the children of the Deputationists and Central Government employees with transfer liability to serve outside the Union Territory.2. The petitioner herein has raised objection against the decision of the respondent authorities regarding inclusion of the name of the respondent No. 5 (Priya Singh) as the candidate under Category-II and enlisting the name of the said respondent No. 5 in the merit list published for the Academic Session 2005-2006 on the ground that the said respondent No. 5 completed her studies in the Academic Session 2004-2005 and passed the qualifying examination from a school in these; Islands. It has also been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the said respondent No. 5 along with her family members left Port Blair in the year 2004 and now studying in Chennai. It has been specifically urged before this Court that t...
Shyam Sundar Goenka and Anr. Vs. the Hon'ble Chief Justice, High Court ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-22-2005
Reported in: (2006)2CALLT97(HC)
ORDERJayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. The petitioners are questioning the decision of the acting Chief Justice dated September 23rd, 2004 appointing a former Judge of this Court as the arbitrator.2. When disputes and differences arose, the second respondent wanted adjudication by the arbitral tribunal according to procedure agreed upon by the parties. In terms of the contract the parties were to appoint their respective nominees, and the two nominees were to appoint the umpire, and thus the arbitral tribunal was to be constituted. There is no dispute that the second respondent named its nominee and duly called upon the petitioners to appoint their nominee, but the petitioners did not act for the purpose.3. In the circumstances the second respondent filed an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Notice of the proceedings was given to the petitioners, but they chose not to enter appearance. By decision dated October 3rd, 2002 the designated Judge disposed ...
Debajoti Prosad Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-22-2005
Reported in: 2006(4)CHN456
Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. Order made by the Sub-divisional Magistrate (S) Berhampore, Murshidabad dated March 11, 2005 has been challenged by the petitioner.2. The Magistrate made the order on the basis of an apparently undated application submitted by the fifth respondent asking for an order to direct police to give necessary help so that he could enter into a shop room by breaking open the lock allegedly put by the petitioner. It was alleged in the application that the petitioner and his father had broken open the lock put by the fifth respondent, and that thereafter they put their lock on the doors of the shop in question. By the order police was directed to help the fifth respondent to break the lock and open the shop. As a result, police and the fifth respondent broke open the lock put on the shop by the petitioner and entered into possession thereof.3. It is to be noted that long before the incident took place, on March 29, 2003, the fifth respondent had instituted a suit (No. 6...
Bhudar Chandra Pal Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-21-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)CHN469
Arun Kumar Mitra, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition was originally appointed as Card Writer-Record Keeper and he was appointed in the year 1976. The petitioner was promoted as a Clerk in the salary and wages Section of the respondent No. 3 in 1982 and according to the petitioner since then he had been rendering satisfactory services to the respondent No. 3 with his utomost sincerity and honesty. The petitioner is an workman within the meaning of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.2. The petitioner challenges an order passed by the respondent No. 2 whereby the said respondent refused to entertain an application under Section 15(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 on the ground that no prima facie case has been made out by the applicant at that stage in order to ascertain his chance of success in this case.3. The background as made out in the writ petition is inter alia as follows :There is a system in the respondent No. 3 Company that on the pay days, if any of the employee of...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »