Kolkata Court April 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.
Bhagaban Das and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-2007
Reported in: (2007)2CALLT430(HC),2007(4)CHN447
Sadhan Kumar Gupta, J.1. This appeal has been preferred the Judgment and order of conviction as passed in Sessions Trial No. 3{8)/87 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Coochbehar wherein he convicted the appellant Bhagwan Das for the offence under Section 304 Part-II of the IPC, appellant Sunil Das for the offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and appellant Jogesh Das for the offence under Section 342 Indian Penal Code.2. The fact leading to the said Sessions Trial is that on the basis of the First Information Report dated 14-6-1983, a case under Sections 148/326/304 Part-I/342/149 Indian Penal Code was started against the accused persons. It was alleged in the First Information Report that the accused persons after forming an unlawful assembly at Dodeyarpar and being armed with deadly weapons, in prosecution of their common object assaulted and caused injuries to one Amulya Das and his sons. It is the specific case of the prosecution that accused Bhagwan Das threw ...
Krishna Kumar Budhia Vs. Anil Kumar Agarwal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)CHN233
Partha Sakha Datta, J.1. By this revisional application the judgment and order dated 20.11.2003 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, 5th Fast Track Court, Calcutta in Criminal Appeal No. 89/2001 confirming thereby the judgment and order dated 21.8.01 passed in Complaint Case No. C-1702/1997 by the Id. Metropolitan Magistrate, 11th Court, Calcutta whereby the learned Magistrate found the petitioner/accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act and convicted him accordingly and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 4,000/-, in default, simple imprisonment for two months together with compensation of Rs. 2,54,160/- is under challenge.2. M/s. Ankit Traders, the complainant represented by the OP No. 1 Anil Kumar Agarwal supplied materials to the petitioner/accused company M/s. Euro Metals and towards discharge of liabilities the accused issued a cheque being No. 887081 dated 24.4.1997 for Rs. 2,54,160/- in favour of the complainant drawn on Oriental Bank of Co...
Bajrang Lal JaIn Vs. Sicom Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Cal205,2008(1)CHN214
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. This appeal is at the instance of a debtor and is directed against the order dated June 9, 2006 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court thereby allowing an application under Section 9(2) of the Presidency Town Insolvency Act, 1909 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and adjudicating the present appellant as an insolvent.2. The facts giving rise to initiation of the proceedings may be summed up thus:(a) The respondent company filed a suit under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure being Summary suit No. 1790 of 2002 against the appellant and one Suresh Kumar Jain on the ground that the respondent company had lent and advanced a sum of Rs. 2 crore to one M/s. Appu Industries Ltd. and the appellant along with Suresh Kumar Jain, had stood guarantor to the said amount of Rs. 2 crore which was to be paid by the borrower company, namely, Appu Industries Ltd. along with an interest at the rate of 15 per cent per annum.(b) In view of the alleged default com...
Ruia Cotex Ltd. Vs. Corporation Bank and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Cal241
ORDERPrabuddha Sankar Banerjee, J.1. This revisional application is one under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and is directed against Order dated 6-4-2004 passed by the Chairperson of Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata in appeal No. DRAT/CAL/17 of 2004.2. The said appeal was preferred by the Corporation Bank who is Opposite Party No. 1 in this case against the order passed by the Kolkata Debts Recovery Tribunal dated 21-4-2004 in connection with Original Application No. 111 of 2002.3. The facts leading to filing of the instant revisional application may be summed up thus:i) The Opposite Party i.e. Corporation Bank filed one application before the said Tribunal for recovery of Rs. 11 crores and odd under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 against the present petitioners and others.ii) The present petitioner filed written statement along with counter claim.iii) While the said application was pending, the present petition...
Shankar Chowdhury Vs. State of W.B. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)CHN429
Debasish Kar Gupta, J.1. The petitioner files this writ application challenging the order passed by the Joint Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Urban Development Department. As per his communication issued under memo No. 410-SL(AL)/BC-203 dated February 22, 2006 the prayer of the original lessee to give permission for transfer of lease hold right in respect of the plot No. BC203, Sector 1, Salt Lake City in favour of the petitioner was rejected.2. The fact of case in a nutshell is this by a registered deed of lease dated March 6, 1972, the aforesaid plot of land in Salt Lake City was transferred by the State Government to the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner. The above deed did not contain any clause apprehending or restricting in any way the right of the lessee to transfer the above plot of land to a third party. By a deed of assignment dated March 29, 2004 the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner transferred the right, title and interest in the aforesaid plot ...
Jyotirmoy Som Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)CHN342
Partha Sakha Datta, J.1. By this application dated 18.08.2006 quashing is prayed for of the proceeding in BGR No. 1839 of 2006 corresponding to Budge Budge P.S. Case No. 72 dated 26.06.2006 under Section 411/414 of the Indian Penal Code now pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate of Alipore on the grounds inter alia that the complaint was filed by the wife (O.P. No. 2) in suppression of the fact that she earlier had filed a case against the petitioner and others under Section 498A/406 IPC vide East Bidhan Nagar P.S. Case No. 108 dated 19.09.2005 under Section 498A/406 of the Indian Penal Code which culminated in submission of chargesheet and thus the present complaint under Section 411/414 of the Indian Penal Code is not maintainable.2. The opposite party No. 2 lodged an FIR being East Bidhan Nagar P.S. Case No. 108 dated 19.09.2006 against the present petitioner and three others alleging the following facts:She was married to the petitioner on 08.03.2004 but sometime afte...
Ashim Maitra and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)CHN143
P.N. Sinha, J.1. This revisional application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short the Code) has been preferred by the petitioners praying for quashing the proceeding of Special Case No. 29 of 2006 now pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, Barasat under Sections 88(4)(b)/88(6)/88(7) of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act (hereinafter called the Sales Tax Act, 1994) and under Section 409/420/120B of the Indian Penal Code (in short the IPC) and for setting aside the orders passed in connection with the said case including the order dated 13.10.2006.2. Mr. Joymalya Bagchi, the learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted that in the FIR only Kamal Chandra Dey, proprietor of M/s. Ganga Tea Traders was made an accused. The petitioners were not named in the FIR. The informant was one N.J. Roy, Commercial Tax Officer, Barrackpore and the FIR was lodged at Bijpur P.S. and, on the basis of such FIR Bijpur P.S. Case No. 95 dated 1.6.05 was started u...
Edmund George Vs. Secretary (Revenue) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-02-2007
Reported in: (2007)3CALLT401(HC),2007(3)CHN358
Sanjib Banerjee, J.1. The provisions of two regulations forming part of the same principal set of regulations in force in these islands, and apparently overlapping, fall for consideration in this appeal.2. But before the legal issue, the facts need first to be noticed. The appeal is directed against an order of June 16, 2006 by which the appellant's challenge to an order passed by the Secretary (Revenue) by way of a writ petition was found to be without any merit. The Secretary (Revenue) had allowed the fifth respondent's appeal from an order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer who had upset the decision-made by the Tehsildar.3. The appellant, the fifth respondents and one Patrick George (who ought to have been impleaded in the writ as he was a party to the proceedings before the Secretary) are sons of late Wilson George. Edmund, the appellant, Godwin, the fifth respondent, and Patrick came to inherit their father's land and applied for partition thereof. The Secretary, (Revenue) reco...
Banibrata Ghosh Vs. State of West Bengal and ors. Overruled
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-02-2007
Reported in: (2007)3CALLT390(HC)
Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay , J.1. This appeal has been preferred at the instance of the writ petitioner from the Judgment and order dated 15th July, 2003 passed by the learned single Judge while deciding the writ petition being CO. No. 18711(W) of 1992.2. The facts of this case are briefly narrated hereinafter:A vacancy was caused in the post of Assistant Teacher (Bio-science) in Shimulia High school; a recognised aided high school in the district of Nadia as the permanent teacher went on leave for six months initially. The Managing Committee decided to fill up the said leave vacancy and obtained permission from the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Nadia in this regard. An advertisement was thereafter published in the daily Amrita Bazar Patrika on December 11, 1990 inviting applications from eligible candidates. In response to the said advertisement, the appellant herein alongwith others submitted applications.Upon completion of the selection procedure, a panel was prepared empane...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›