Kolkata Court November 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.
Mukti Majumder Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-22-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ1423
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and order of the learned trial Judge of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Tenth Additional District Judge, Alipore) passed in proceeding under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'). The appellant was the claimant before the learned court below which awarded a sum of Rs. 85,886 on account of compensation as against her claim of Rs. 5,00,000. The facts of the case involved in this appeal are stated in short hereunder:The appellant met with an accident on 5.11.1998 at about 11.15 a.m. while she was travelling by autorickshaw and proceeding towards Pal Bazar, Behala, 24-Paraganas (South). A Matador van bearing registration No. WB 03-A 0666 came from opposite direction and dashed against the autorickshaw in which she was travelling. She suffered fractures on six ribs on the right side and also sustained head injury. She was taken to A.M.R.I. Hospital and she remained there ...
Smt. Madhumita Sarkar Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-22-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Cal234
ORDERGirish Chandra Gupta, J.1. The admitted facts of the case briefly stated are as follows. Chinmoy Sarkar, aged about 43 years, took out a Janata Personal Accident Insurance Policy, for a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs, for the period between 31st March, 1998 and 30th March, 2010. His wife Srimati Madhumita Sarkar was appointed nominee. Chinmoy Sarkar died in a car accident on 25th June, 2003 leaving him surviving his widow Shrimati Madhumita Sarkar and two minor daughters : Antarlina Sarkar born on 4th October, 1996 and Somrupa Sarkar born on 6th August, 2001. On 30th June, 2003 the respondent/insurance company was duly intimated about the aforesaid death. On 29th July, 2003 by a letter she requested the insurance company to arrange for payment of the sum assured.2. On 1st August, 2003 the insurer purported to write a letter addressed to the de-ceased-Chinmoy Sarkar that as per the direction of the Head Office vide their letter dated 29th August, 2002 all the Janata Personal Accident policies...
Basudeo Khaitan and ors. Vs. Madan Lal Periwal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-21-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)CHN392
Aniruddha Bose, J.1. The instant interlocutory motion has been taken out by the petitioner under Rule 11(d) of Order 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure ('Code' in short) for dismissal of the suit on the grounds of multifariousness, misjoinder of plaintiffs and misjoinder of causes of action. The suit out of which present proceeding arises was instituted by the plaintiffs, being six individuals and an incorporated company claiming decree for a sum of Rs. 56,12,250/-. The first defendant is an individual, whereas the second defendant, being the petitioner herein is a partnership firm, of which the second, third, fourth, fifth and the sixth defendants have been described as partners. Fifteen other individuals have also been impleaded in the suit as proforma defendants. The plaintiff Nos. 1 to 6 and the proforma defendants appear to be members of different branches of the same family, and had equity holding in two limited companies.2. The case of the plaintiffs is that there was a dispute am...
Chand Mohammad and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-21-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)CHN497,[2007(113)FLR964]
Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.1. Appellant No. 1 was a primary teacher under the Malda District Primary School Council. His date of birth was July 14, 1942. His natural date of superannuation was July 31, 2002 when he was to attain the age of 60 years.2. Under Rule 14(b) of the Recruitment and Leave Rules, 1991 in case a primary teacher was declared permanently incapacitated by competent medical board set up therefor and he was allowed to retire prematurely at least two years before he attained the age of superannuation and it was found that his family was in extreme economic hardship due to sudden retirement, his or her dependant would be considered for compassionate appointment. The appellant No. 1 was ill and he applied on November 24, 1999 to the District Primary School Council for his premature retirement coupled with a prayer for consideration of his son being appellant No. 2 for compassionate appointment. At that time the appellant No. 1 was well within the cut off date for being elig...
Cesc Limited and ors. Vs. Pawan Kumar Kedia
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-21-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Cal71,2007(1)CHN532
Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.1. The respondent was a consumer of electricity under the appellants. On the allegation of pilferage his electricity connection was disconnected without any notice. He was served with a demand by the appellants after a provisional assessment of the loss occurred to the appellants due to such pilferage. The respondent No. 1 approached this Court by filing the above writ petition. By an interim order the electricity was restored upon payment of 50% of the amount so demanded. The writ petition was finally disposed of by the learned Single Judge by judgment and order dated July 10, 2003 by which the writ petition was allowed. The Chief Electrical Inspector, West Bengal was directed to adjudicate the dispute between the parties upon giving appropriate hearing to them.2. Being aggrieved by, and dissatisfied with, the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge the appellants preferred the present appeal.3. Mr. Lalit Kumar Poddar, learned Counsel appearing for the a...
Anup Samanta Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-21-2006
Reported in: 1(2007)CLT672
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. This mandamus appeal is at the instance of an unsuccessful writ petitioner and is directed against an order dated 21st July, 2006 passed by a learned single Judge, by which His Lordship refused to entertain the writ application on the ground that the dispute involved in the writ petition was of civil in nature.2. Being dissatisfied the writ petitioner has come up with the present mandamus appeal.3. The appellant filed the aforesaid petition alleging the private respondents forcibly entered into the disputed property of which the appellant is the owner on 22nd April, 2005, as a result, in the past, he approached this Court in writ jurisdiction which was disposed of by a learned single Judge thereby directing the Officer in charge of the concerned police station to drive away the private respondent and to put the appellant into possession. According to the appellant, pursuant to such order he got possession. On 14th July, 2003 the private respondent again enter...
Amar Nath BaIn and anr. Vs. District Magistrate and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-17-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)CHN346
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. This mandamus appeal is at the instance of the writ petitioners and is directed against order dated 19th April, 2005 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court by which His Lordship disposed of the writ application filed by the appellants by directing the Secretary, Irrigation and Waterways Department, Government of West Bengal to take necessary step for repairing the sluice-gate in question at an early date and at any rate, before 8th June, 2005. By the said order His Lordship further directed the said Secretary of the Government of West Bengal to provide necessary fund in this regard so that the maintenance and repairing works of the sluice-gate in question were not delayed in any circumstances.2. Being dissatisfied, the writ petitioners have come up with the present mandamus appeal.3. The case made out by the appellants in their writ application may be summed up thus:(a) The writ petitioner No. 1 is a bona fide bargadar in respect of the land mentioned...
Goutam Das Vs. Garden Reach Shipbuilders Engineers Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-17-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)CHN178
Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.1. Respondent No. 1 published the advertisement on August 2, 1980 for the post of Assistant Store Officer. In the advertisement five years experience in store department of any reputed engineering concern was required for being eligible to apply for the same post. The appellant had three years experience and as such he was not eligible for the said post. He applied for the said post claiming to be a Scheduled Caste candidate. The post was a single one and as such there was no reservation prescribed therefor. In support of his claim as a Scheduled Caste candidate, he submitted a certificate from the then Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta. Pertinent to mention, Scheduled Caste Certificate could only be issued by the prescribed authority being the concerned Block Development Officer. The judicial officer was not empowered to issue such certificate. However, the respondent No. 1 considered the said certificate as a valid one and considered the appellant for the said...
Andrew Yule and Co. Ltd. Vs. Descon Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-17-2006
Reported in: 2007(3)CHN287
Aniruddha Bose, J.1. The present interlocutory motion, being G. A. No. 1745 of 2006 is taken out by the petitioner primarily to prevent the respondent, DESCON LIMITED, from issuing equity shares on preferential basis, upto a limit of 49% of the increased subscribed equity share capital. When this interlocutory motion was taken out, the respondent, whom I shall refer to as DESCON in the later part of this judgment, was contemplating issuing such equity shares on preferential basis in favour of certain venture capitalists, at a premium of not less than Rs. 600/- for every equity share of Rs. 10/- each. An extraordinary general meeting was convened on 9th June, 2006 for taking a resolution for this purpose, and the main prayer in the interlocutory motion was to restrain holding of such meeting.2. The meeting was, however, held and the shareholders of DESCON appears to have passed a resolution to that effect on 9th June, 2006. This Court, however, by an order passed on 14th June, 2006 dire...
Labanya Prova Mitra Vs. Purnendu Kumar Ghose and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-17-2006
Reported in: 2008(1)CHN30
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. By this appeal the judgment and order dated 20th May, 1994 of the learned Additional District Judge, Second Court, Howrah, granting probate of a Will has been assailed. The application for grant of probate of a testamentary instrument said to be of one Balai Charan Ghosh, since deceased, was made by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 viz. Purnendu Kumar Ghosh and Ardhendu Kumar Ghosh who were the named executors of the said Will dated 12th March, 1978 and it was marked as case No. 137 of 1981. On issuance of citation the appellant along with one Kanailal Ghosh filed their respective written statements. The appellant contested the said application for grant while Kanailal Ghosh being the father of the applicant/respondent, supported the grant obviously because of their relationship. Whether there is contest or not the Probate Court has to be satisfied that the Will was validly and lawfully executed by the testator and the same is proved clearing the doubt from the m...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »