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.
Coal India Ltd. Vs. Central Bank of India and ors.
Court: DRAT Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-01-2006
Reported in: I(2007)BC173
1. The matter relates to an application by the petitioner/appellant, Coal India Ltd., under Section 21 of the RDDBFI Act, 1993, praying for waiver of the mandatory pre-deposit of the 75% of the amount due on debt together with an application for stay.2. It has been submitted by the learned Advocate for the petitioner that the petitioner/appellant filed this appeal against an order passed ex parts against the petitioner and others on 10th May, 1999 whereon the learned Tribunal below had recorded the findings that none of the defendants appeared to contest the suit despite service of notices and paper publication and therefore the suit was taken up for ex parte hearing. It was further recorded that the conduct of the defendants in not appearing to contest the suit before the Tribunal was indicative of the fact that they did not dispute the claim of the applicant-Bank and that, therefore outstanding claim of the applicant-Bank was allowed ex parte with costs alongwith interest pendents l...
Abl International Limited and anr. Vs. Kolkata Municipal Corporation a ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-01-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)CHN499
Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J.1. The petitioners constructed about 12,480 sq.ft. on the terrace of the tenth floor of a multi-storeyed building known as 'Air Conditioned Market' at Shakespeare Sarani without obtaining any sanction from the Municipal authority. Such construction was raised in early 1980. The annual valuation of such illegal construction was assessed by the Municipal authority for the first time for the Assessment Period commencing from GR4/84-85. Rates and taxes in respect of such unauthorised construction has also been realised regularly by the Municipal authority from the petitioners since then.2. Subsequently, a demolition proceeding being Demolition Case No. 137-D/2002-03 was initiated under Section 400(1) of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act by the Municipal authority. The said proceeding was disposed of by the Special Officer, Building on 18th February, 2003 with the following orders:1. (a) The P.Rs. shall retain the impugned construction shown in red colour in th...
Shambhu Nath Das Vs. Samita Ghosh Moulick
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-01-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)CHN781
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. I have gone through the draft judgment prepared by my learned Brother with brevity but clarity and I fully agree with His Lordship's findings and ordering portion. Still then, I feel, I shall be failing to discharge my duty as a Member of the Bench if I do not contribute anything expressing my own words with the risk of redundancy.2. Reading from both the pleadings I find that there is no dispute regarding validity and legality of the agreement dated 24th February, 1997. It is not in dispute further that the plaintiff had paid a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- and took possession of flat in suit. It appears from the pleading that both the parties raised dispute regarding area of the flat contrary to terms of concluded contract being Ext. 1, for the agreement there was no provision for measurement of the flat agreed to be sold as sought being to be raised unnecessarily by the plaintiff relying on a document being Ext.2 on the one hand, on the other hand the defendant c...
SudhIn Chandra Barman Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-01-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ4656
P.N. Sinha, J.1. This appeal by the appellant is assailing the judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Special cum Additional Sessions Judge, Co-ochbehar sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to suffer R.I. for one month for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal-Code (in short I.P.C.).2. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 5th July, 2001 Sushil Barman, father of informant and Gour Chandra Barman (younger brother-in-law of informant) were cutting Jute in a field in front of Atialdanga BSF camp. At about 8.30/9.00 a.m. the accused Sudhin Barman came there to the jute field and he first tried to assault Gour Barman with a 'beki' i.e. a kind of 'dao' i.e. sharp cutting weapon but missed it and Gour Barman ran away to a safer distance. Thereafter, the accused Sudhin Barman assaulted Sushil Barman with the 'beki' and he raised alarm receiving blows given by the accused with 'beki' and he fell down on the grou...
Sri Prithwish Chowdhury and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-01-2006
Reported in: (2007)1CALLT192(HC)
Amit Talukdar, J.1. For salvaging their lost fortune suffered before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 5th Court, Alipore in Sessions Trial No. 2(1) 1995 on account of their conviction passed on 31.3.99 the Appellants - Prithwish Chowdhury (for short, 'A1'), Smt. Sefali Chowdhury (for short, 'A2') and Smt. Pratima Chowdhury (for short, 'A3') (the husband, mother-in-law and unmarried sister-in-law respectively of the deceased Anjana) have preferred this Criminal Appeal.2. While it may be of poor consolation for little Moumita alias Rini (PW11) to be apprised of the exact cause of the death of her mother Anjana in the forenoon of 22.5.1991, the same has baffled the Autopsy Surgeon, Dr. P.B. Das (PW10). Additional Chief Medical Officer of Health, Alipore; another expert on the same profession PW2. Prof. Apurba Kumar Nandy, Professor and Head of the Department of Forensic Science and State Medicine, Calcutta Medical College & Hospital and Vice-Principal and also former Expert, Prof. J...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›