Kolkata Court February 2007 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.
Hindustan Copper Limited Vs. Bank of Baroda
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-20-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)CHN382
ORDER1. This is an application for modification and/or correction of the order dated 9th February, 1999 passed by a Division Bench presided over by Ruma Pal, J and Ansari J. (as Their Lordships then were). The appeal arose out of an order passed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by which the learned Trial Court passed an order dated 4th May, 1998 directing the appellant to return the two bank drafts both dated 8th January, 1998 to the bank for cancellation and the Branch Manager, Sayajigunj Branch of Bank of Baroda was directed to invest the money in a separate fixed deposit account free from any lien. It was further directed that the money shall remain to the credit of the arbitration proceedings and shall abide by the result of the arbitrator. The appellant/ petitioner preferred the appeal which was finally disposed of by a judgment and order dated 9th February, 1999. The Appellate Court came to a conclusion that the bank guarantee was unconditional and no...
Mahesh Oil Mill and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-19-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Cal203,2007(3)CHN787
ORDERJayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. The petitioners are questioning the demand made by CESC, the second respondent, by issuing bill for the month of September 2004. By that CESC called upon the first petitioner to pay the unrealised arrears of February, March, April, May, September, and October 1993. In the bill it gave notice to the first petitioner that if the demand amount was not paid within the due date, then supply of electricity would be cut off. The first petitioner was called upon to pay the amount by November 1st, 2004. Since in spite of objection raised by the petitioners CESC insisted on payment of the demanded amount, they took out the present writ petition dated March 3rd, 2005.2. Bills raised by CESC from July 8th, 1989 to January 21st, 1993 were disputed by the petitioners. Failing to get relief from CESC, they took out a writ petition before this Court. That was registered as C.O. 2208 (W) of 1992. By an order dated November 17th, 1992 that writ petition was disposed of re...
Burdwan Iron and Steel Company (P) Ltd. and anr. Vs. Commissioner of C ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-16-2007
Reported in: (2007)2CALLT647(HC),2007(2)CHN647,2008(230)ELT419(Cal)
Soumitra Pal, J.1. In the writ application the petitioners - the petitioner No. 1 being a private limited company carrying on business as a manufacturer of excisable goods and the petitioner No. 2 one of its directors - have challenged the order dated 11th December, 2006 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise Bolpur Commissionerate under the Central Excise Act, 1944 confirming a demand of Rs. 69,50,934/- against the petitioner No. 1 under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short 'the Act') and against the imposition of penalty of an equal sum under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 25(1)(a) read with Section 11AC of the Act on several grounds.2. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the excise authorities relying on the judgment of the Apex Court in Chanan Singh and Sons v. Collector of Central Excise and Ors. reported in : 1999ECR296(SC) submitted since order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise is an appealable order under Section 35B ...
Chhedi Lal Gupta Vs. Suresh Damani and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-15-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)CHN273
P.N. Sinha, J.1. These two revisional applications under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short the Code) are aimed at quashing the criminal proceedings being Complaint Case No. C-5488 of 2003 and Complaint Case No. C-5489 of 2003 under Section 138/141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter called the N.I. Act), 1881 now pending in the Court of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 12th Court, Calcutta. As the facts and legal principles of both the complaint cases and the present revisional applications are identical, I intend to dispose of both the revisional applications by this common judgment and order.2. Before I proceed to enter into the merit of the revisional applications, I think it fruitful to mention the facts as disclosed in the complaints of the two cases. The revisional application bearing No. CRR No. 3890 of 2006 has been filed praying for quashing the case No. C-5488 of 2003 and the CRR No. 3891 of 2006 has been filed prayin...
Subodh Chandra Singha and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-15-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ1721
Kalidas Mukherjee, J.1. This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and sentence recorded by the Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Bankura in Sessions Case No. 7 of July, 1988 corresponding to Sessions Trial No. 1 of March, 1990, convicting the appellants herein under Section 302/34 of the I.P.C. and sentencing each of them to suffer R.I. for life.2. One Ramkrishna Singha lodged complaint with Raipur P.S. alleging that he married Amala Rani Singha, (widow), the eldest daughter of Tarit Kanti Singha on 7-2-1986 at Mahamaya Mandir at Raiptir in presence of priest and other witnesses. The marriage was held on consent of both the parties. On the next day i.e. on 8-2-1986 in the morning he and his wife came to the house at Chuagara and in the afternoon the brothers of his wife namely Shyamsunder Sinha, Subodh Chandra Singha and Subul Chandra Singha sons of Tarit Kanti Singha of Chuagara came and uttering abusive words, threatened to kill them. In this connection, he lodged a di...
Rina Das Vs. Gosaidas Chatterjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-15-2007
Reported in: (2007)3CALLT33(HC)
Arun Kumar Bhattacharya, J.1. The present revision is directed against the order being No. 64 dated 12.9.2006 passed by the learned 3rd Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Sealdah in R.S. 169/96 disposing of the application under Section 17(2) of the W.B.P.T. Act filed by the petitioner without disposing of the application under Order 6 Rule 17 CP Code for amendment of the said application under Section 17(2).2. The circumstances leading the present application are that the O.P./plaintiff instituted the said T.S. 169/96 for eviction on 23.4.96. The petitioner/defendant after entering appearance on 24.7.97 filed the said application under Section 17(2) and (2A)(b) of the W.B.P.T. Act, hereinafter referred to as the said Act. On 18.7.2000 the petitioner filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 C.P. Code for amendment of the said application under Section 17(2) for suspension of rent from 31.12.99 till the date of her re-entry into the disputed premises and adjustment of Rs. 2...
Amit Biswas Vs. State of W.B. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)CHN9
1. This application under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of an applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 and is directed against order dated 21st September, 2006 passed by the learned Tribunal below thereby disposing of the application by directing the employer to initiate and complete the departmental proceedings against the writ petitioner within a period of one year from the date of communication of the order. The Tribunal has further passed an order that in case, the departmental proceedings are not completed within one year, the order of suspension should stand quashed. The writ petitioner was directed to cooperate with the employer in the matter of carriage of departmental proceedings.2. Being dissatisfied, the employee has come up before us with the present writ application.3. The following facts are not in dispute:The writ petitioner is an employee under the State Government and was arrested in connection with a crimin...
Ganesh Chakraborty and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)CHN134
Dipankar Datta, J.1. The two petitioners are residents of Singur, in the district of Hooghly. They claim to be members of the Krishi Banchao Committee, consisting of the people of Singur who have been protesting the action of the State Govt. in acquiring agricultural lands in Singur for the purpose of setting up of 'TATA Small Car Project'. They have approached this Court in its Writ Jurisdiction questioning the validity and/or propriety of a prohibitory order under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereafter the Code) promulgated by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Chandernagore, respondent No. 3 herein, on 4.2.07 to be effective till midnight of 14.2.07.2. Before adverting to the contents of the impugned order and the rival submissions advanced at the Bar, certain facts may be noted.3. By notification dated 21.7.06 the Collector, Hooghly had issued notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereafter the said Act) conveying that lands as mentioned in t...
Dulal Ghosh Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)CHN284
S.P. Talukdar, J.1. The present case arising out of an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code is directed against the judgment and order dated 13th March, 2006 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, 4th Court, Alipore, 24-Parganas (South), affirming the order dated 27.02.2003 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, in connection with Canning Police Station Case No. 160 dated 25.12.2000 under Section 302/34/120B of Indian Penal Code read with Section 25/27 of the Arms Act, (corresponding to BGR No. 4965/2000) pending before the learned Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, 24-Parganas (South).2. Grievances of the petitioner may briefly be stated as follows:A complaint was lodged by one, Chittaranjan Mirdha, with the Inspector-in-Charge of Canning Police Station alleging that on 25th December, 2000 at about 12-00 noon when his son, Dipak Mirdha, was in a saloon under the name and style, 'Sundaram' at Ca...
Bani Israil Zinnatunnessa Bibi Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)CHN295,2007CriLJ1859
Alok Kumar Basu, J.1. Before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Suri in the district of Birbhum, Bani Israil, Ekramul Haque, Suratunnessa Bibi and Zinatunnessa Bibi faced the trial under Sections 302/34 and 201/34 of the IPC and, that apart, Bani Israil alone faced the trial under Section 364 of the IPC in connection with Sessions Trial No. 1(8) of 1982 corresponding to Sessions Case No. 72 of 1981.2. After conclusion of trial, Bani Israil was convicted under Sections 302/34, 364 and 201/34 of the IPC while Suratunnessa Bibi and Zinnatunnessa Bibi were convicted under Sections 302/34 and 201/34 of IPC. Ekramul Haque was, however, acquitted of all the charges.3. Bani Israil along with Suratunnessa Bibi and Zinnatunnessa Bibi were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 302/34 of the IPC and no separate sentence was recorded against Bani Israil, Suratunneasa Bibi and Zinnatunnessa Bibi under Section 201/34 or against Bani Israll under Section 364 o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »