Kolkata Court May 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.
Sayed DaraIn Alias Ahsan Alias DaraIn and Abuzar HossaIn Alias Gulam H ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-12-2006
Reported in: (2006)2CALLT547(HC),2006(4)CHN392
Prabab Kumar Deb, J.1. The two appeals being CRA 240 of 2003 and CRA 244 of 2003 have been directed against the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, 13th Court, 24 Parganas (South), Alipore in connection with Sessions Trial No 02(8) of 2001.2. The brutal and shocking incident of murder of a political personality occurred in the busy area of Garden Reach. The prosecution case, as narrated in the FIR and elaborated further during the course of the trial, was to the effect that while Md. Jahangir @ Mogal moved along Iron Gate Road towards Garden Reach Road, he was accosted by few miscreants. Encircling him, the miscreants started firing at him. All the miscreants were reported to have had machines in their hands. Md. Jahangir collapsed on the street after being shot from close range. The miscreants numbering 8 to 10 persons dispersed to different directions on seeing the witnesses converging in the place of occurrence.3. As blood gushed from ...
Laddu Gopal Bajoria and anr. Vs. the Kolkata Municipal Corporation and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-12-2006
Reported in: (2006)3CALLT50(HC),2006(4)CHN136
Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J.1. Two proceedings were initiated by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation against the petitioners on the basis of the complaints made by the respondent Nos. 11 to 17 who introduced themselves as transferee owners of the premises No. 60/1, Ballygunj Circular Road, Kolkata-700 019.. One of such proceedings was initiated under Section 400(1) of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) for demolition of the alleged illegal construction made by the petitioners at the said premises. The other proceeding was initiated under Section 416 of the said Act for illegal change of user of the said premises by the petitioners without sanction and/or permission from the Municipal authority.2. Admittedly National Motors of which Laddu Gopal Bajoria is the proprietor, is a tenant of the entire premises No. 60/1, Ballygunj Circular Road, Kolkata-19 comprising of 48 Cottachs of land together with a building and outhouses standing thereon.3. Immedi...
The Board of Trustees for the Port of Kolkata and anr. Vs. Swahom Ship ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-12-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Cal239
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J.1. This appeal is arising out of an order dated June 28, 2005 passed by Hon'ble First Court disposing of the writ petition inter alia holding that the Port Authority was negligent in not taking steps after expiry of two months as to disentitle it to claim demurrage charges. Further His Lordship held that the Port Trust is not entitled to get full demurrage charges till 4th April, 2003 which has to be. shared equally by the Port Trust and the writ petitioners and the balance demurrage should be waived by the Port Trust.2. Facts of the case briefly are as follows:On November 13, 2001 two loaded containers were landed at the Port of Kolkata per vessel 'Cambodia Star'. The petitioner No. 1 acted as the sub-agent of the Foreign Slot Charterer of Singapore in the matter of. clearance of the said two containers which arrived from Jakarta. The respondent No. 5 was the consignee. 3. No representation was made by the writ petitioner either to the Customs Authorities or to...
Tapan Kumar Ghosh and ors. Vs. State of W.B. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-12-2006
Reported in: (2006)3CALLT181(HC),2006(3)CHN784
P.N. Sinha, J.1. The petitioners have not knocked the door of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter called the Code) praying for quashing of criminal proceeding being G.R. Case No. 1275 of 1994 arising out of Jalpaiguri Kotwali P.S Case No. 370 dated 11.10.94 under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code (in short IPC) now pending in the Court of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (in short SDJM) - now redesignated as ACJM and also the chargesheet filed in the said G.R. Case in CRR No. 1142 of 1996 and also for quashing of complaint case being C.R. No. 317 of 1994 now pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Court, Jalpaiguri under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as NI Act) through revisional application being CRR No. 2753/96. As both the criminal proceedings arose out of same facts and parties are same as well as points of law involved are same in these two revisional applications...
Narendra Kochar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-12-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)CHN307
V.S. Sirpurkar, C.J.1. This is a very unusual petition filed by a person who claims to be a public minded person and describes himself in paragraph 3 of the petitioner as a citizen of India entitled to be ensured that the rule of law is upheld and every offender is treated equally by law as envisaged under Article 14 of the Constitution. Beyond that the petitioner has not in any manner shown his credentials in the society, his status in the society or even his role as a person having experience in the matter.2. There is nothing stated about the status of the petitioner or his standing or for that matter even as to his avocation in life or his qualifications. A complaint is made against the gambling which goes on in the television channels sponsored by various manufacturers or sponsors in the form of various competitions. The petitioner has referred to the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act, the Madras Gaming Act, the Hyderabed Prevention of Public Gaming Act and the West Bengal Gambling...
Rita Bhattacharya and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-12-2006
Reported in: (2007)1CALLT43(HC)
Sailendra Prasad Talukdar, J.1. Petitioners by filing an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure sought for quashing of the proceeding in G.R. Case No. 1212 of 2000 under Section 498(A)/406 of the Indian Penal Code now pending before the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, (re-designated as A.C.J.M.), Durgapur, District-Burdwan.2. Grievances of the petitioners may briefly be stated as follows:The only son of the petitioners namely, Stabak Sundar Bhattacharjee got married to O.P. No. 2 on 24th November, 1999. It was duly solemnised according to Hindu Rites and Customs Petitioners' son, Stabak, resides at Brookton, U.S.A., after marriage, Stabak left for U.S.A. on 05.12.1999. Opposite Party No. 2 after getting Pass Port and Visa went to U.S.A. on 05.02.2000. An amount of Rs. 33,500/- was paid by the petitioners in connection with such journey of O.P. No. 2 to U.S.A. This was acknowledged by the father of the O.P. No. 2 by letter dated 16.02.2000. But O.P. ...
Tata Steel Ltd. Vs. Indira Singh and Sons P. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-12-2006
Reported in: [2008]141CompCas224(Cal)
Indira Banerjee, J.1. This application has been filed by the petitioning creditor for recalling the order dated March 29, 2006, whereby this Court dismissed the winding up application filed by the petitioning creditor being C.P. No, 14 of 2006 on the ground that the registered office of the company had been shifted from 7A, Rameswar Shaw Road, Kolkata-700014, to the Union Territory of Chandigarh.The winding up application was filed on January 7, 2006. Diverse directions were issued in the said application from time to time. The petitioning creditor also moved an interim application being C.A. No. 60 of 2006 praying for appointment of provisional liquidator over the assets and properties of the company and also an order of injunction restraining the company from dealing with its assets and properties including premises No. 17, Tuglak Road, New Delhi.2. By an order interim dated January 19, 2006, this Court restrained the company from dealing with any of its assets or properties includin...
Ajay Kumar Tarafdar Vs. the Appropriate Authority and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-11-2006
Reported in: (2006)3CALLT645(HC)
Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. The writ petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the appropriate authority, under Section 269UD(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, dated May 13th, 2004 directing that the property in question would be deemed to be purchased by the Central Government for Rs. 11,10,000/-, being the amount equal to the amount of apparent consideration.2. The petitioner and the private respondents entered into a sale agreement dated August 31st, 1987. In terms of the agreement the immovable property located at 50, Radhanath Choudhury Road, Kolkata-700 015 (land measuring about ninety cottahs together with a one storied brick built building and outhouses with covered shades and a water reservoir) was to be sold by the private respondents to the petitioner for Rs. 11,10,000/-. On September 14th, 1987 the parties to the agreement submitted the requisite statement in form 37-I before the appropriate authority. By the pre-emptive purchase order under Section 269UD(1) of the Income-tax Ac...
Saibal Dey Vs. Chaitali Dey and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-11-2006
Reported in: I(2007)DMC398
Sadhan Kumar Gupta, J.1. The judgment of the Court was as follows : This revisional application has been preferred against the order dated 22.12.2004 passed under Section 125, Cr.P.C. in Misc. Case No. 116 of 2004 by the Judge, Family Court, Kolkata. Case of the petitioner is that O.P. No. 1 is his legally married wife. But soon after the marriage trouble started in between them and finally the O.P. No. 1 left the marital home on 4.8.2003 and since then she is staying at her paternal house. The O.P/wife filed a criminal case against the petitioner and his family members. Subsequently on 30.7.2004 she filed an application under Section 125, Cr.P.C., against the petitioner in the Family Court, Kolkata praying for maintenance. The learned Court below fixed 14.9.2004 for the petitioner to file show cause as to why the prayer for maintenance and ad interim maintenance would not be allowed. However, no process was served upon the petitioner. Inspite of that, the learned Judge fixed 4.11.2004...
Harish Chandra Sarkar and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-10-2006
Reported in: (2007)1CALLT25(HC)
Soumitra Pal, J.1. In the writ petition the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 the President and Secretary respectively of Rajlakshmi Kanya Vidyapith, Barajaguli, Nadia (for short 'the said institution') have challenged the order appointing Administrator in the said institution in pursuance to the Memo. No. NAD-724/06/G/1 dated 17th February, 2006 issued by the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education (for short 'the Board'). They have also prayed for cancellation of the intimation dated 18th February, 2006 issued by the Administrator of Rajlakshmi Kanya Vidyapith, in Barajagulia, Nadia, the respondent No. 7. Challenging the said memo and the intimation, the matter was moved on 9th March, 2006 when direction for affidavits were issued. No interim order was passed. However, it was recorded that action taken by the Administrator shall abide by the result of the writ petition.2. Against the said order an appeal was preferred wherein an order was passed. The relevant portion is as under:2. In view of...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »