Kolkata Court March 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.
Raj Kumar Rowla Vs. Manabendra Banerjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-27-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Cal154,2007(2)CHN752
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. The above appeal was preferred against an order of injunction passed in a Miscellaneous Case No. 1941 of 2005 filed in the learned City Civil Court at Calcutta for restoration of the suit. The respondent Banerjee filed a suit in the City Civil Court at Calcutta some times in the year 2002 challenging a consent decree. The said suit was dismissed for default on or about 19th August, 2006. In order to restore the suit the aforesaid Misc. Case was filed. In the said Misc. Case an application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure was made and the impugned order was passed thereon. In terms of the earlier order dated 6th December, 2006 the appeal and the application filed in connection therewith were decided to be heard together on 31 st January, 2007 and indeed it was heard on that day and on that date none appeared for respondent. This Court passed an order on 31st January, 2007 setting aside the order impugned with ...
S.N. Dabholkar Vs. Duroplus India Private Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-27-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)CHN86
Partha Sakha Datta, J.1. The judgment and order dated 17.07.2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 7th Fast Track Court, Bichar Bhawan, Calcutta in Criminal Appeal No. 9 of 2003 confirming thereby the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 14th Court, Calcutta in Case No. C-1194/99 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the petitioner said to be the proprietor of M/s. Dabholkar Enterprises is the subject-matter of challenge in this revisional application.2. Before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate the opposite party/complainant lodged the complaint alleging that pursuant to the order placed by the petitioner (accused) the complainant (o.p.) supplied materials and raised a bill dated 17.07.1997 worth Rs. 2,47,962.54 P. which the accused assured the complainant of payment. Thus, towards discharge of liability the accused issued two cheques one dated 18.12.1998 for Rs. 50,000/- and another da...
Ranjit Khosla Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-26-2007
Reported in: (2007)2CALLT444(HC)
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. These two writ applications under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India were heard analogously as both these applications were directed against the selfsame order dated September 15, 2006 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, in O.A. No. 271 of 2006 thereby allowing an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) filed by Shri A.K. Malhotra, one of the respondents before us (hereinafter referred to as 'Malhotra') by directing the Union of India to refix the date of appointment of one Ranjit Khosla, the writ-petitioner in one of these applications, (hereinafter called 'Khosla') in terms of the Railway Boards letter dated 10th April, 1970.2. Being dissatisfied, these two writ-applications, one at the instance of Khosla who was a respondent in the proceedings before the Tribunal and other, at the instance of the Union of India, the employer, who was also a respondent therein,...
The Secretary, West Bengal Regional School Service Commission (Souther ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-26-2007
Reported in: (2007)2CALLT548(HC)
Pratap Kumar Ray, J.1. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties.2. Challenging the Judgment and order dated 23rd June, 2003 passed by Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J. in W.P. No. 4738 (W) of 2003 this appeal has been preferred. By the said Judgment under appeal the learned Trial Judge allowed the writ application by quashing and setting aside the impugned order in the writ application namely, the decision of the Regional School Service Commission recalling the recommendation of the name of the writ petitioner as earlier issued for her appointment in the concerned school, a secondary school which is controlled and guided by the Rules of Management of Recognised Non-Government Institutions (Aided and Unaided) Rules, 1969 (hereinafter referred to for brevity as the Management Rules, 1969) and the decision of the Managing Committee cancelling the appointment of the writ petitioner in the school in question in view of recalling of the recommendation by the School Service Commission. Th...
Tata Steel Limited and anr. Vs. Indra Singh and Sons Private Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-26-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)CHN71,[2008]141CompCas263(Cal),(2008)1CompLJ479(Cal)
Bhaskar Bhattacharya , J.1. This Letters Patent appeal is at the instance of on applicant for winding up of a company and is directed against two orders, one dated 29th March, 2006 and the other, dated 12th May, 2006 both passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Company Petition No. 14 of 2006, company Application No. 60 of 2006 and T. No. 152 of 2006. By the first order dated 29th March, 2006, the learned Single Judge dismissed an application for winding up of a company on the ground that the registered office of the company having been transferred to Chandigarh from Kolkata, the winding up application was not maintainable in this Court.2. The appellant having filed an application for review of the said order dated 29th March., 2006, the learned Single Judge by the latter order dated May 12, 2006 dismissed such application by affirming the earlier order dated 29th March, 2006, with specific assigned reasons.3. Being dissatisfied, the present appeal has been preferred challeng...
Omkar Singh Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-26-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)CHN466
Sadhan Kumar Gupta, J.1. This revisional application has been preferred under Section 397/401 read with Section 482 of the Cr. PC against the order dated 27.2.2007 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Act, 6th Court at Barasat.2. Case of the petitioner is that he along with other accused persons are facing trial in the NDPS case, as pending in the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 6th Court, Barasat.3. The prosecution case is that on 6.8.2003 at 22.55 hours, on receiving telephonic information, police raided the hotel Gitanjali situated at Barasat and on search made on different rooms in the said hotel, 1.3 Kgs. of contraband heroin were recovered allegedly from the accused persons.4. Case was investigated and after completion of investigation, chargesheet was submitted against the accused persons. Subsequently charge was framed against all the accused persons on 16.9.2005 and trial was started by way of recording of evidence of the witnesses. During trial as many as...
Dropadi Properties (P) Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-2007
Reported in: (2007)108TTJ(Kol.)774
1. The above two appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dt. 12th Dec, 2005 of the learned CIT(A)-VII, Kolkata, relating to asst. yrs. 2001-02 and 2002-03, respectively. Since grounds are identical in both the appeals, therefore, these are disposed of in this common order for the sake of convenience. ITA No. 302/Kol/2006 (asst yr. 2001-02): 2. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 30th Oct., 2001 declaring the total income at Rs. 4,66,140 which was processed under Section 143(1)(a) on 27th Dec, 2002. Subsequently, in response to notice under Section 148, the assessee requested the AO to accept the original return as return filed in response to notice under Section 148. The AO during the course of assessment proceedings found that the assessee earned rental income of Rs. 16,62,817.64 which was the only income of the assessee. However, he found that the assessee claimed this income as business income and claimed the various...
Gujarat Nre Coke Ltd. Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-2007
Reported in: [2007]139CompCas772(Cal),(2007)2CompLJ538(Cal),[2007]76SCL436(Cal)
Dipankar Datta, J.1. It is the case of the petitioners that sometime in the month of March 2006, they came to learn that the respondents 2 and 3 were proceeding to obtain finance from the securities market by issuing prospectus/letter of offer in the name of Gremach Infrastructure Equipments and Projects Limited (hereafter 'Gremach'). Since the petitioners were of the view that the respondents 2 and 3 have suppressed relevant facts in the said prospectus/letter of offer and statements contained therein are false which would mislead the investors, they lodged a complaint dated 13-3-2006 through their learned Advocate on record. The complaint was addressed to the Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereafter 'SEBI') having office at Nariman Point, Mumbai, with a copy thereof to the Regional Office of SEBI at 16, Camac Street, Kolkata-700 017. In view of the contents of the complaint, the petitioners prayed before SEBI to restrain the respondents 2 and 3 and Sourashtra Projects Limite...
Krishan Gupta and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ2502
ORDERAshim Kumar Roy, J.1. The petitioner was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentence to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 months and to pay a compensation of Rs. 5 lakhs in a trial held before the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24-Parganas. The said order of conviction and sentence was challenged in a Criminal Appeal before the Sessions Court, South 24-Parganas at Alipore and in the said appeal her order of conviction although was confirmed but the sentence of fine was set aside and the amount of compensation has been reduced to Rs. 3,90,780/-.In this criminal revision the petitioner challenged the aforesaid judgment and order of the Appellate Court.2. The trial of the petitioner was held on a charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act before the Learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magsitrate, Alipore, South 24-Parganas in connection with the case No. C-914/2000, on the fo...
Keya Mukherjee Vs. Magma Leasing Limited and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)CHN429
Partha Sakha Datta, J.1. By this application under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Cr.PC what is challenged is an order dated 26.9.2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 7th Fast Track Court, Calcutta in Criminal Revision No. 36 of 2006 confirming thereby the order dated 2.2.2006 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 11th Court, Calcutta incase No. C-510 of 2003 wherein the learned Magistrate rejected the petitioner's prayer for dispensing with her examination under Section 313 Cr.PC by examination of the pleader who was to represent her under Section 205 of Cr.PC.2. It was a case under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The petitioner appeared before the learned Magistrate on 2.6.2003 and was released on bail and then on 31.1.2004 she was examined under Section 251 Cr.PC. On 3.7.2004 as she was absent warrant of arrest was issued against her but on 20.7.2004 she surrendered before the learned Magistrate and was released on bail. Then recording of evidence wa...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »