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.
Gita Nandi Vs. Union Bank of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-19-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)CHN580
Tapen Sen, J.1. Heard the parties.2. It is evident that the petitioner had come to this Court in W. P. No. 3102 (W) of 2005. Pursuant to the order passed therein on 28.2.05, the respondents have considered the case of the petitioner and have passed an order on 26.4.2005 which has been communicated vide letter as contained in Annexure P8 appended to writ petition. Upon a perusal of the impugned order, it is evident that the petitioner's husband died on 17.4.2001. It is also evident that the family of the deceased receives a monthly pension of Rs. 2,159/-.3. Mr. Ghosh, appearing for the respondents, states that now the monthly pension is Rs. 2,672/-.4. In a judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Umesh Kumar Nagpal v. State of Haryana reported in : [1994]3SCR893 Their Lordships have held as follows:2. The question relates to the considerations which should guide while giving appointment in public services on compassionate ground. It appears that there has been a go...
Prabhat Ranjan Das Vs. District Inspector of Schools (S.E.) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-19-2006
Reported in: [2007(113)FLR523]
Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. The petitioner requested the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), South 24-Parganas for considering the question of granting him benefits for eighteen years. According to him he was entitled to get the benefits. In response the District Inspector of Schools issued the impugned order dated December 1, 2004, which is : 'In reference to the above, the undersigned has to state that his 18 years benefit case will be taken up for consideration as and when the special pay paid to Sri Das has been refunded as excess amount drawn through Treasury Challan No. T.R. 'Form-7 with an intimation to this office.'2. Counsel for the State finds nothing to justify the action of the District Inspector of Schools. He is unable to say under what provision of law the District Inspector of Schools was empowered to put the condition that unless the petitioner paid the special pay allegedly received by him in excess of legal entitlement. His request for granting him benefits of eight...
Dr. Sudarshan Mondal and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-15-2006
Reported in: (2007)(2)SLJ48CAT
1. Since all these O.As. are similar in nature, they are being taken up together and are being decided by this common order. For the sake of convenience we are taking up O.A. 755/05, the first of all the three O.As., for detailed consideration and reasoning thereof will be applicable to all the three O.As.2. In O.A. 755/05 the applicant Dr. Sudarshan Mondal has filed an application Under Section 19 of the A.T. Act, 1985 claiming the following reliefs: (a) An order holding that the denial of promotion as Chief Medical Officer (Non-Functional Selection Grade) and his supersession by his juniors in the matter of such promotion are wholly arbitrary and bad in law. (b) An order directing the respondents to review the DPC relating to promotions to the post of as Chief Medical Officer (Non-Functional Selection Grade) made under Dynamic Assured Career Progression Scheme in the year 2002 as well as in the year 2005 and to consider the case of the applicant for such promotion and to grant all c...
Ashwani Kumar Malhotra Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-15-2006
Reported in: (2007)(1)SLJ350CAT
1. Shri A.K. Malhotra now working as Chief Personnel Officer, Eastern Railway, Calcutta has filed this application challenging fixation of his seniority in the cadre of Indian Railway Service of Mechanical Engineering vis-a-vis Shri R. Khosla, respondent No. 3, now working as Chief Personnel Officer, Western Railway, Churchgate, Mumbai. He has prayed for the following reliefs: (a) to pass an appropriate order directing upon the respondents to assign the appropriate seniority to the applicant as per Classified List of the Gazetted Establishment of Mechanical Department published in the year 2000. Following this list, the applicant's seniority position should remain at 08 positions above that of Shri R. Khosla. (b) to pass an appropriate order directing upon the respondents to assign the correct relative seniority position of the applicant, vis-a-vis, the respondent No. 3 in terms of the Railway Board's Circular dated 10.4.1970 as well as judgment and order passed by the Hon'ble CAT, Al...
Manoj Singh and Dharma Mahato @ Dharam Nath Mahato and ors. Vs. State ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-15-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)CHN123
P.N. Sinha, J.1. The appellants being convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 13th Court, Alipore in Sessions Trial Case No. 3(1) of 2000 under Sections 302 and 302/34 of Indian Penal Code (in short IPC) and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and further sentence of payment of fine of Rs. 10,000/- each, in default, R.I. for three months each have preferred the above stated two separate appeals challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence imposed on them. The appellant Manoj Singh who was convicted and sentenced by the Trial Court for the offence under Section 302/34 of the IPC has preferred the appeal being CRA No. 221 of 2001. Appellant Dharma Mahato alias Dharam Nath Mahato who was convicted and sentenced under Section 302 of IPC and the rest four appellants who were convicted and sentenced under Section 302/34 of IPC jointly have preferred the appeal being CRA No. 224 of 2001. Though the accused appellants have preferred two separate appe...
Sunny Detergent Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-15-2006
Reported in: 2007(207)ELT331(Cal)
Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.1. On November 30, 1997 Commissioner of Central Excise passed an order as against the appellant demanding a sum of Rs. 33,36,289.00 by way of duty, Rs. 7.00 lacs by way of penalty and interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1944'). The appellant filed an appeal before the Customs, Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'CEGAT'). To prefer an appeal from the order of the Commissioner the appellant was required to deposit the amount so directed to be paid on protest. The appellant, however, did not deposit the disputed amount and filed an application for dispensation of the deposit. The Tribunal heard the said application and admitted the appeal on condition that the appellant must deposit Rs. 5.00 lacs towards duty, Rs. 2.00 lacs towards penalty and Rs. 11.00 lacs by adjustment of the amount if available in Modvat Account. The rest of the demand was stayed by the tribunal....
Naru Gopal Chakraborty and ors. Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-15-2006
Reported in: (2007)1CALLT284(HC)
Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J.1. Fifteen members of the Debipur Gram Panchayat out of twenty-one members, by their notice dated 22nd February, 2006 requested the Pradhan of the said Gram Panchayat to convene a meeting for transacting an agenda for removal of the Pradhan of the said Gram Panchayat.2. In spite of best efforts, the said notice could not be served upon the Pradhan directly though repeated attempts were made to serve the said notice upon the Pradhan by registered post. Ultimately the said notice was served upon the office of the Gram Panchayat on 23rd February, 2006.3. Since no meeting was convened by the Pradhan for the aforesaid purpose, the requisitionists themselves, by their notice dated 13th March, 2006, called a meeting to be held at the office of the Gram Panchayat on 21st March, 2006 for the said purpose.4. The Pradhan was intimated about the said meeting by notice dated 13th March, 2006 issued by the requisitionists which was admittedly received by the Pradhan on 15th...
Shri Satyajit Basu Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-15-2006
Reported in: 1(2007)CLT539
Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J.1. The legality and/or validity of the proceeding of the requisitioned meeting of the Board of Directors held on 21st April, 2006 at the Conference Hall of the Jalpaiguri Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., has been challenged by the removed Chairman of the Board of Directors in this writ petition.2. The Board of Directors is composed of nine elected Directors, three State nominees, one nominee from the Zilla Parishad and one nominated by the employees.3. Out of these fourteen members of the Board of the Directors, eleven members have the voting right.4. Nine members of the Board of Directors, by their letter dated 12th April, 2006 requested the Chief Executive Officer of the said Co-operative Bank to call a meeting of the Board of Directors of the said bank on or within 21st April, 2006 for taking a decision on the agenda of removal of the Chairman of the said Bank.5. Upon receipt of the said notice, the Chief Executive Officer convened a meeting to be held on 21...
Ananda Publishers Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-15-2006
Reported in: 2007(3)CHN68
Prabuddha Sankar Banerjee, J.1. This revisional application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code is at the instance of the petitioners who were accused persons in the case which was numbered as C-859 of 2004 pending before the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 13th Court, Calcutta.2. The said case was brought by the present opposite party No. 2 for alleged offence under Section 418/420/120B of Indian Penal Code and was filed before the Court of learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Calcutta.3. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate after taking cognizance of the offence transferred the case to the Court of learned 13th Metropolitan Magistrate.4. The opposite party No. 2 filed the said case claiming himself to be an educated person having obtained his Ph. D degree from Moscow State University (formerly USSR). It is the case of the complainant of that case that the present petitioners are the translator, publisher, cover designer and printer of...
Simplex Concrete Piles (India) Ltd. and Geo Millar and Company Ltd. Vs ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-14-2006
Reported in: (2007)207CTR(Cal)484,[2006]286ITR518(Cal)
Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.Subject controversy:1. Both the appellants were assessees under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the said 'Act'). By virtue of the order of the appellate authority being the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) they got the refund of a part of the tax paid and/or deposited through tax deducted at source (TDS). Subject controversy was with regard to payment of interest. The assessee claimed interest on such refund because of delayed payment. Such prayer was rejected by the authority on the ground that interest was not payable in terms of Section 244A(4) of the said Act. The order of refusal of payment of interest on such refund was challenged in a writ petition which was dismissed by the learned single judge. The order of dismissal by the learned single judge was impugned in this writ petition. The learned single judge held, inter alia, as follows:After hearing the parties and after analysing the decisions cited before me by the learned advoca...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »