Kolkata Court January 2006 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.
Soham Dutta Vs. Sudhangshu Kumar Ghosh and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-13-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)CHN655
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. This first appeal is at the instance of a plaintiff in a suit for eviction and is directed against the judgment and decree dated October 1, 1996 passed by the learned Judge, Second Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta in Title Suit No. 1289 of 1985 thereby dismissing the suit only on the ground of want of a valid notice of quit in terms of Section 13(6) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act.2. The appellant herein filed the aforesaid suit for eviction of the respondent on the allegation that the respondent became a tenant under the appellant by virtue of a registered deed of lease dated 13th September, 1982 for 25 years but the respondent having violated the terms of the said lease by making default in payment of rent and also by subletting without the consent of the appellant was liable to be evicted.3. The suit was, therefore, in essence, a suit for eviction on the allegation of forfeiture. There is no dispute that prior to the filing of the suit, a notice...
Vikram Murarka and anr. Vs. Assessor-collector (North-south) Division ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-2006
Reported in: (2006)2CALLT30(HC)
Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J.1. The Court : In this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the impugned notices of hearing issued by the Municipal authority under Section 184(3)/Section 184(4) of the West Bengal Act LIX of 1980 being annexures 'P-1' and 'P-4' to this writ petition on the ground of vagueness and/or lack of material particulars.2. The petitioners are the occupiers of Flat No. 6C on the 6th Floor, Tower-C at premises No. 96 Garden Reach Road. Kolkata-700023, the possession of which was given to the petitioners by the owners thereof pursuant to an agreement for sale entered into between the petitioners on the one hand and the owners of the said flat, viz., M/s. Steel Products Ltd. and M/s. Rishab Exports Ltd. on the other hand.2.1. The-assessment of the said flat was made for the first time by the Municipal authority with effect from the 2nd quarter 2003-04. Hearing notices under Section 184(3)/section 184(4) of the West Bengal Act LIX of 1980 (hereinafter...
Sri Bhudev Biswas Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-12-2006
Reported in: (2006)2CALLT231(HC),[2006(110)FLR1122]
V.S. Sirpurkar, C.J.1. This appeal is against the order of the learned single Judge whereby the learned single Judge has dismissed the writ petition holding that the petitioner was not entitled to be regularised as teacher since he was not an organising teacher. In this the learned single Judge has given the finding of fact that the said teacher was employed on 2nd April, 1984 but the inspection by the District Level Inspection Team (hereinafter referred to as DLIT) had taken place earlier to that and his name was not to be found in the inspection report as the teacher was not present at the time of DLIT inspection. The learned single Judge has also directed that the salary, if any, earned by the original writ petitioner should be refunded and for that purpose recovery should be made since the original appointment of the writ petitioner itself was bad and unjustified in law.2. The following facts will highlight the controversy involved in the matter.2.1. The writ petitioner claimed tha...
Raghunath Bhattacharjee Vs. Lt. Governor and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-10-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)CHN89
Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. The appellant is aggrieved by the order of the Single Judge dated December 15, 2004 dismissing his writ petition.2. The writ petition was filed questioning the decision of the authority dated June 28, 2004 given in compliance with the order of a Single Judge of this Court dated March 19, 2004 made in the appellant's previous writ petition.3. The authority considered his request for allotment of a plot of homestead land measuring 33 acres, in view of his claim that he was entitled to such allotment in terms of a Scheme dated December 8, 1950.4. The Scheme dated December 8, 1950 was framed by the Government for giving certain concessions mentioned therein to 83 non-agriculturist families displaced from the erstwhile East Bengal. One of the concessions was each family was to be given a plot of homestead land measuring 33 acres. The family to which the appellant belonged was one of the displaced families.5. Though in terms of the Scheme the family was at liberty ...
Bimal Kumar Singhania Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-06-2006
Reported in: (2006)100TTJ(Kol.)790
1. These three appeals preferred by the aforesaid assessees are directed against the separate orders passed by the CIT(A), Ranchi (Jharkhand). Since facts are identical and some grounds are common, therefore, all these appeals are disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. Brief facts relating to these cases are that search and seizure operations were conducted in the residential/business premises of the assessees as well as bank locker with Central Bank of India, Ranchi standing in the joint names of Sri Kamal Kumar Singhania and Smt.Rachana Singhania on 30th Jan., 2002. All these assessees are brothers to each other. Search operations were also conducted at the residential premises of Sri Prahlad Rai Singhania, who is the father, of these assessees, and business premises of M/s Vinimay Leasing Finance (P) Ltd., wherein all the aforesaid assessees were shareholders. In course of said search, the following assets were found and seized by the Department: Sri Kamal ...
Abdul Hai Mondal and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-06-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)CHN502
Arun Kumar Bhattacharya, J.1. The hearing stems from an application under Section 482 Cr. PC filed by the petitioner praying for quashing the FIR being No. 54 dated 01.07.98 of P.S. Haroa, North 24-Parganas, pending in the Court of Id. SDJM, Basirhat, North 24-Parganas.2. The petitioners' contention as per above application is that on 30.06.98 at about 10.00 a.m. accused Sahid Munshi, Sibobrata Das etc. accompanied by a few henchmen being armed with deadly weapons assembled at Gazitola fishery. Out of them one anti-social element viz Sirajul Biswas threatened the petitioners to dispossess them declaring that- even if police personnel come, they would not be spared if the petitioners tried to intimidate them, for which an FIR was lodged on behalf of the petitioners, and Haroa P.S. Case No. 52 dated 30.06.98 under Sections 148/149/447/435/379 IPC /25/27 Arms Act was started, and the investigation is still pending. Due to flow of accused persons, as the petitioners were scared about loss ...
Sri Pradip Chakraborty and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-06-2006
Reported in: (2006)3CALLT328(HC)
Arun Kumar Mitra, J.1. Challenge in this writ petition is the appointment of the Administrator by the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education which has been issued through Memo No. S/111/2 dated 20.02.2004 being annexure 'P-26' to the writ petition. The said impugned memo has been issued by the Secretary, West Bengal Board of Secondary Education. Challenge of the said impugned memo is on the following grounds:1) The memo has been issued by the President under Section 28(2) of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education Act, 1963 (as amended) that is in exercise of emergency power. According to the senior learned counsel, emergency has not been disclosed and the President cannot exercise emergency power without any reason or disclosing emergency.2) This is a case of supersession of A Managing Committee during its valid tenure and as such the provisions of Rule 8 of the Management of Recognised Non-Government Institutions (Aided and Unaided) Rules, 1969 (hereinafter as Management Rules...
Ferring Pharmaceuticals Private Ltd. and anr. Vs. Assistant Commission ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-05-2006
Reported in: (2006)1CALLT577(HC),2006(1)CHN557,[2006]147STC252(Cal)
Asok Kumar Ganguly, J.1. This writ petition by M/s. Perring Pharmaceuticals Private Limited was filed challenging an order dated 26.9.2003 passed by the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal which was an order of remand as also the order dated 21.1.2004 passed by the respondent No. 3 the Commercial Tax Officer imposing therein a penalty.2. Relevant facts of the case are that a consignment of goods being consign ment No. 18772795 dated 2nd January, 2002 was imported into West Bengal and the said consignment contained two packages including 20 boxes each containing 5 ampoules of Remestyp Injection amounting to Rs. 1,39,104/- and another package containing 90 boxes of one ampoule of Decapeptyl Injection amounting to Rs. 5,04,252/-. It is further pleaded that the said consignment was accompanied with one Air consignment note covering the entire stock of goods transferred from Mumbai to Kolkata and the two different stock transfer notes being Nos. 18 and 22 both dated 25.1.2002 pertaining to the co...
Bisram Arak Vs. Eastern Coalfields Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-05-2006
Reported in: (2006)2CALLT59(HC),[2006(109)FLR1166],(2007)IILLJ40Cal
Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. The writ petitioner has twofold grievances: (i) benefits on account of gratuity were not paid to him for full length of his service; (ii) no interest was paid for delay in paying the benefits on account of gratuity.2. There is no dispute that the petitioner retired from the service of the company with effect from May 17th, 2000. In December 1999 the company directed him to submit the necessary papers for payment of gratuity. It is not the case of the respondents that for laches on the part of the petitioner the benefits on account of gratuity could not be paid on May 17th, 2000. There is also no dispute that in two installments a sum of Rs. 2,67,247/- was paid to the petitioner on account of benefits of gratuity. Payments were made on February 1st, 2001 and October 9th, 2002;3. The writ petition was taken out on Janizary 7th, 2003. The petitioner alleged that though he was entitled to get the benefits on account of gratuity for 45 years, for undisclosed reaso...
Kamala Bhuniya Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-04-2006
Reported in: 2006(1)CHN439,2006CriLJ998
Alok Kumar Basu, J.1. The sole appellant, Kamala Bhuniya, preferred this appeal in the year 1995, challenging her conviction and sentence by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Tamluk in connection with Sessions Trial No. 1(1) of 1995 arising out of G. R. Case No. 865 of 1987.2. The prosecution case in brief was that on 23rd September, 1987, between 11.30 a.m and 12 p.m. the appellant killed her husband, Netai Charan Bhuniya with an axe at village Gumai under Panskura Police Station. Getting the information of murder of Netai from the neighbours, the FIR maker rushed to the spot along with others and through the window, he saw the deadbody of Netai in a pool of blood and the appellant standing near the deadbody with the axe in her hand.3. On getting information of the murder through the complaint, officers of Panskura police station arrived at the place of occurrence and they arrested the appellant along with weapon.4. The police officer-in-charge of investigation, subsequently conducted...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »