Kolkata Court September 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.
T.K. Sarkar Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-27-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)ARBLR508(Cal)
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. This appeal is against the judgment and order dated 12th April, 2005 passed by the learned Trial Judge whereby and whereunder an award passed by the learned sole arbitrator dated 5th March, 2003 is set aside, on the application of the respondent, State of West Bengal under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'). The short facts of present appeal are set out hereunder:Appellant hereunder contended that there has been a concluded contract for execution of certain civil works between the appellant and the respondent. The said agreement was concluded upon acceptance of tender submitted by the appellant, by the Superintending Engineer, Mayurakshi Canal Circle by his Memorandum No. 4084 dated 28th May, 1979. The detailed work was also stated in the work order. The appellant started work and indeed completed certain ground works but the respondent illegally terminated the work order and thereby the appellant...
Bijul Pharma-chem (P) Ltd. Vs. E.R. Squibb and Sons Llc
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-27-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)CHN713
Pranab Kumar Deb, J.1. The two revisional applications being C.O. No. 4305 of 2005 and C.O. No. 866 of 2006 filed by the Bijul Pharma-Chem (P) Ltd. have been heard along with the revisional application being C.O. No. 3287 of 2005 filed by M/S. E. R. Squibb & Sons LLC The revisional application being C.O. No. 4305 of 2005 has been directed against the order dated 28.10.05, whereby the petition under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment of the prayer portion of the plaint was rejected. The revisional application being No. 866 of 2006 was directed against the order dated 28.02.06 passed by the learned District Judge in Misc. Appeal No. 237 of 2004, whereby the prayer for extension of the period of supply was rejected. The revisional application being No. 3287 of 2005 was filed by M/s. Squibb & Sons LLC challenging the order dated 12th May, 2005, in Misc. Appeal No. 237 of 2004, whereby the learned District Judge, Howrah was pleased to extend the period of supply of goods in terms of the cont...
Harendra Nath Ghose and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-27-2006
Reported in: 2007(3)CHN34,2008(1)CTLJ114(Cal)
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. The appellants before us having suffered a money decree in a suit for recovery of the excess consideration amount, have assailed the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division, First Court, Krishnanagar). The first respondent, Union of India through the Divisional Organizer, Special Service Bureau (in short, S.S.B.), South Bengal Division, Calcutta, Group Centre at Sarat Pally, P.O.- Krishnagar, P.S.-Kotwali, District - Nadia had filed the suit in which decree was passed directing the defendants viz. the appellants herein as well as the respondent Nos. 2 to 7 and the proforma respondent Nos. 8 to 24 and the respondent Nos. 25 and 26.2. The facts stated in the plaint are briefly reproduced hereinafter. The S.S.B., Directorate General of Security under the Cabinet Secretary, Government of India had its central office at 'Raj Bati' at Krishnagar under police station Kotwali in the District of Nadia. For setting up its own headquarter...
Aparna Pal and ors. Vs. Anil Kumar Giri and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-27-2006
Reported in: 2007(4)CHN213
Pranab Kumar Deb, J.1. This instant revisional application has been directed against the order dated 01.03.06, whereby the report of the learned Commissioner was accepted.2. In moving the revisional application, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in accepting the report of the Commissioner, the learned Trial Court was oblivious of the fact that the points sought by the petitioner to be determined on commission were not answered. In view of the categorical admission made by the Commissioner that he did not mention 'Ka' scheduled in the field book, it cannot be assumed that the land as referred to in 'Ka' schedule was actually surveyed.3. Defending the order of the Trial Court, the learned Counsel representing the opposite party has submitted that all points raised by the petitioners and the opposite party in their respective applications were answered by the Commissioner. Thorough investigation of 'Ka' and 'Ka 1' scheduled lands having been made, the Trial Court r...
ifb Agro Industries Ltd. and ors. Vs. the Excise Commissioner and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)CHN473
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. Both these mandamus-appeals were heard analogously as common questions are involved in these appeals. The subject-matter of these appeals is the order passed by a learned Single Judge dated 12thApril, 2006 by which His Lordship disposed of the. two writ - applications by which the order dated 15thDecember, 2004 passed by the Principal Secretary, Excise Department, Government of West Bengal was challenged.2. The grant of exclusive privilege-area of manufacture and sale of the country-liquor as provided in Section 22 of the Bengal Excise Act, 1909 was the dispute involved before the Principal Secretary. According to said provision, the State Government may grant to any person on such condition and for such period, as it may think fit, the exclusive privilege -(a) of manufacturing, or supplying by wholesale, or(b) of manufacturing, and supplying by wholesale, or(c) of selling, by wholesale or retail, or(d) of manufacturing or supplying by wholesale and selling r...
Kalpana Banerjee and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)CHN166
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. This mandamus appeal is at the instance of the writ petitioners (seven in number) and is directed against the order dated August 9, 2006 passed by a learned Single Judge by which His Lordship disposed of the writ application by directing the Principal Secretary, Excise Department, Government of West Bengal to implement his order dated 15th December, 2004 and in the event the petitioners or any of them cannot be tagged with the nearest warehouse, he should indicate the reasons therefor.2. Being dissatisfied, the writ petitioners have come up with the present mandamus appeal.3. The writ petitioners are all carrying on business of retail sale of country spirit and for the purpose of running those shops, they have obtained respective licences from the appropriate authorities according to the provision of the Bengal Excise Act, 1909 and the rules framed thereunder.4. In view of establishment of a new bottling plant at Sainthia, the State-respondent decided to real...
Himangshu Das Sharma Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-2006
Reported in: (2007)2CALLT222(HC)
Amit Talukdar, J.1. When avarice claimed the Appellant (in his capacity as a Sub-Post Master), little did he realise that it would cost him his career, his happiness and all he had for himself.2. Such is the tale, which has been told in the Prosecution Case where a Sub-Post Master (the Appellant) of a District Town leading an otherwise peaceful life with his soul mate and two siblings, when greed overpowered him and he defalcated the deposit which was made by the Complainant (P.W.7) in her Postal Savings Account, maintained in the Post Office he was posted at.3. Life took a different course since then which not only resulted in the Appellant assailing his conviction awarded by the learned First Special Court; it not only denuded him from the pride of a Public Servant but also robbed the tranquility and peace of a home consisting of two girl children and his wife, who, of course, did not live to see the end result of the Trial.4. We are now asked to reapprise his fate, suffered before t...
Pranab @ Kuti Biswas Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-2006
Reported in: 2007(3)CHN78
Amit Talukdar, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 13.8.2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Third Court, Krishnanagar, Nadia in Sessions Trial No. 1 of September, 2001. By the impugned judgment the sole appellant was convicted in respect of the charge of Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and he was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-; in default, to suffer further imprisonment for one year.2. Learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that the impugned order of conviction passed against the appellant was liable to be set aside on several grounds. According to the learned Advocate for the appellant P.W.8 was the only eye-witness of the case; but his evidence was liable to be disbelieved.3. Learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that the prosecution case is--on the date of occurrence i.e., 20.4.2001 at about 8.25 p.m. P.W.8 was lying with his wife Ashalata (the deceased) in their bedroom. He...
Bishnu Chakraborty and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-2006
Reported in: 2007(3)CHN754
Sailendra Prasad Talukdar, J.1. The petitioners by filing the instant application Under Section 401/482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure sought for quashing of the impugned proceedings as well as for setting aside the impugned order dated 17th May, 2006 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore, 24-Parganas (North) in G.R. Case No. 258 of 2006.2. It relates to Bizpure P.S. Case No. 18 of 2006 dated 19th January, 2006 Under Section 306/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code3. The backdrop of the present case may briefly be stated as follows:One Sovana Routh filed an application Under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the learned Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore on 3rd January, 2006 against the present petitioners. She alleged that she is a widow. Her son, Keshab Routh, constructed his own house and was residing there with his family situated at Sharat Villa Gali, Kanchrapara Police Station, Bizpur. On 22nd November...
Central Bank of India Vs. Warisi Sales Corporation and ors.
Court: DRAT Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-22-2006
Reported in: 2(2007)BC23
1. The appeal by the Bank arises out of judgments and orders passed by the D.R.T., Guwahati, Assam, on 24th October, 2002 and 19th December, 2002. For the purpose of this appeal, however, the grievance of the appellant-Bank primarily stems from the judgment and order of the Tribunal dated 24th October, 2002. By that order though the counter-claim of the defendant-respondents was dismissed by the Tribunal for lack of evidence, the appellant was also deprived of the realization of its full claim with interest since the application by the Bank was only partly allowed. The learned Tribunal below held that the appellant-Bank was only entitled to a certificate for a sum of Rs. 8,76,328.58 only with interest pre-suit at the rate of 16.5% per annum with quarterly rest and pendente lite as well as post-suit @ 12.5% per annum till realization. The reasons for the decision made by the learned Tribunal are analytical and compact and demonstrates proper application of mind in the matter of reducti...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »