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.
Raja Ram Estate Vs. Niharmoni Law and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-04-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)CHN465
Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.1. One Narendra Nath Law was the absolute owner of premises No. 96, Raja Rammohan Sarani; Calcutta. He died leaving a Will by making his son Arun Kumar Law as the sole beneficiary whereas his wife Smt. Niharmoni Law was given life interest under the said Will. Both Niharmoni and Arun (hereinafter referred to as 'Laws') entered into a development agreement along with one Raja Ram Estate. Under the agreement Raja Ram Estate was to develop the property upon such terms and conditions as recorded in the said agreement. By a further agreement a portion of the said property was agreed to be sold to Raja Ram by Laws. Prior to such agreement being entered into Laws entered into another agreement with a third party for which a litigation was then pending which was settled at the instance of Raja Ram. According to Raja Ram they not only paid substantial sums to Laws but also took steps for eviction of tenants and/or occupants from the said premises in question. They also c...
Pacha Alias Buddhadeb Mete and ors. Vs. the State of West Bengal and o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-04-2006
Reported in: (2006)3CALLT109(HC),2007(1)CHN448
Sadan Kumar Gupta, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the order of conviction, as passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, Birbhum, Suri against the accused/appellants in Sessions Trial No. 4 of May, 2002 whereby the learned Judge, convicted all the accused persons for the commission of offence under Sections 302/149 IPC and under Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced all of them to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine for the offence under Sections 302/149 IPC and also to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay fine for the offence under Section 147 IPC.2. On 08.06.99 at about 6.25 a.m. the defacto complainant Smt. Anuva Mete submitted a written complaint to the O.C. Labhpur P.S. stating therein that on that day when her husband's brother Dulal @ Dhulo Mete was going to attend nature's call, at that time all the accused persons attacked him out of previous enmity. In order to save his life, Dhulo cried for help and entered into the courtyar...
Commr. of Cus. (Preventive) Vs. Dungarmal Mohata
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-04-2006
Reported in: 2006(200)ELT522(Cal)
P.N. Sinha, J.1. The facts giving rise to the filing of this application under Section 130A of the Customs Act, 1962 by the applicant Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), West Bengal, Calcutta may be summarised as follows:2. On 13.7.99 the Customs Officers attached to Berhampore Customs Preventive Unit received one telephonic information that a truck loaded with betelnuts had left Siliguri for Calcutta. The officers of Customs ambushed themselves by the side 6f NH-34 at the outskirt of Berhampore town. At about 03.00 hours of 14.7.99 the Customs Officers intercepted one truck near Bhakuri on NH-34 and from the documents available with the driver it was revealed that 125 bags of betel nuts were loaded in the truck from Dhupguri and was consigned to M/s. Venkatessa Supari Bhander, Erode, Tamil Nadu. The driver was in possession of two road challans bearing Nos. B-10/99 and B-11/99 both dated 10.7.99. From the challan No. B-11/99 it was revealed that another truck loaded with 195 bags of...
Shrikant Mantri and ors. Vs. Radheshyam Chotia and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-03-2006
Reported in: (2006)3CALLT230(HC)
Tapan Kumar Dutt, J.1. Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties. The defendant Nos. 1 to 4 in a suit being C.S. No. 232 of 1999 have preferred this appeal challenging an order dated June 20, 2005 passed by the Hon'ble First Court in G.A. No. 61 of 2005. The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are the plaintiffs in the suit and the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are the defendant Nos. 5 and 6 in the suit.2. The plaintiffs/respondents filed the suit claiming leave under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure and also under Order 1 Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The plaintiffs/respondents prayed inter alia for a decree for removal of the defendants/appellants as trustees of a certain Smt. Kamla Devi Mantri Charity Trust and for appointment of fit and proper persons as trustees, framing of a scheme for the purpose of proper management and administration of the trust and for enquiry into the funds and accounts standing in the name of the trustees and a decree for a certain sum of mone...
Modern Food Industries (i) Limited Vs. Modern Bakery and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-03-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)CHN65,2007(34)PTC504(Cal)
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J.1. The appeal being A.P.0.T. No. 32 of 2006 was filed by the appellant/petitioner Modern Food Industries (I) Limited (hereinafter referred to as the said company) from an order dated 14th November, 2005 passed by the Hon'ble First Court. Similarly, the appeal being A.P.O.T. No. 39 of 2006 was filed by M/s. Modern Bakery and Others (hereinafter referred to as the said firm and its partners). Both the appeals were directed against an order dated 14th November, 2005 passed by the Hon'ble First Court.2. We have heard the learned senior Advocates for the parties.3. Facts of the case briefly are as follows:The said company is a public sector undertaking under the administrative control of the Ministry of Agriculture/Ministry of Food Processing Industries under the Government of India. The said company was incorporated in the year 1965. The production had commenced in the year 1968.4. The case of the said company that the bread produced by the said company has been sol...
Atanu Kumar Ghosal Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-03-2006
Reported in: II(2007)ACC345,2007ACJ650
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta and Aniruddha Bose, JJ.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal (Additional District & Sessions Judge), Durgapur dated 16.6.2003. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation granted by the Tribunal, the appellant has preferred this appeal.2. Appellant was a victim of an accident which occurred between a bus and truck. He was travelling in the bus from Siliguri and the truck which was coming from the opposite side collided face to face. It is admitted position that petitioner sustained injuries and after getting medical treatment he recovered from his injuries. However, he lost 3 fingers of his right hand, which were ultimately amputated. In order to get medical treatment, initially, he was admitted to a local hospital at Gajol and from there he was taken to the Malda District Hospital where the treatment was found to be not in commensurate to the need and as a result whereof, the victim had t...
Ghentu Mondal and ors. and Baidya Nath Mondal and ors. Vs. the State o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-02-2006
Reported in: (2006)3CALLT196(HC)
Pranab Kumar Deb, J.1. The two appeals being C.R.A. 475 of 1989 and C.R.A. 35 of 1990 have been directed against the Judgment and order dated 15.12.1989 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Krishnanagar in connection with Sessions Trial No. 3 of March 1989.2. The grueling incident resulting in the murder of a person, infliction of grievous hurt to some others and maiming of a remaining one occurred on 22/03/1983 at about 08-00 hrs., at Dharapara, Anchal No. 2, P.S. Tehatta. The prosecution came, out with positive allegation that the appellants along with other miscreants armed and equipped with deadly weapons stormed into the house of Dwijendra Nath Biswas where Joydeb Mondal, Laxmi Joardar, Santu Mondal, Ajit Mondal and Kama Mondal had taken shelter. Perturbed and terrified by the menacing advance of the miscreants, Joydeb Mondal moved into the adjacent room of Mirmadan Biswas. Instigated by Ramen Mondal, the appellants namely Joydeb Mondal, Baidyanath Mondal, R...
Magma Leasing Limited Vs. Gujarat Composite Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-02-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Cal288
1. This appeal is directed against the order of the Hon'ble first Court dated 7th September. 2004 whereby and whereunder His Lordship has been pleased to set aside, the award passed by the learned Sole Arbitrator on merit. Before His Lordship the respondent (applicant therein) took two broad points - (1) learned Arbitrator had no jurisdiction to decide the subject matter: (2) the impugned award was passed without giving opportunity of hearing in real sense and furthermore no reason has been given by the learned Arbitrator.2. The respondent specifically raised preliminary point of jurisdiction under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before the learned Arbitrator and the learned Arbitrator has rejected the plea of lack of jurisdiction and while doing so has given reasons upon interpreting documents and also applying the principle of law decided by the Courts. The Hon'ble first Court did not find any fault in this decision making process by the learned Arbitrator on...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›