Kolkata Court June 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.
Biswanath Hazra Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-20-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)CHN52
1. None appears for the respondents when the matter was called on for hearing.2. It is a matter of 2005 and it is a case of dismissal from services. On 19th September, 2004 direction for filing affidavit was given. On 16th February, 2006 department noted that no affidavit-in-opposition has been filed. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that a copy of affidavit-in-opposition has been supplied to him and he has made affidavit-in-reply ready.3. When there is no appearance on behalf of the respondents nor they file any opposition, we can* take up the matter for hearing. In our view, at this stage no such affidavit is required as all facts have already been placed before the learned Tribunal and relevant documents have been annexed to this application. Therefore, it hardly matters whether this Court gets any opposition or not.4. The brief fact of the case is that the petitioner joined service as a constable in or about October, 1971. In April, 1987 while he was posted at Noapara...
Palash Chatterjee Vs. State of W.B. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-20-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ4215
ORDERPartha Sakha Datta, J.1. By this application under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. prayer is made for quashing of the proceedings of Barangar PS Case No. 136, dated 6-7-2005 under Section 403/415/420 of the IPC pending before the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore on the ground of no disclosure of commission of offence through the FIR.2. The opposite party No. 2 herein lodged an FIR on 6-7-2005 against the present petitioner, the Manager of Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. along with some others i.e. Anup Garula, Director of the said company, Pinaki Kanji, an officer of the said company and one Surendra Khanna, Additional Director of the said company under Section 403/415/420 of the IPC alleging the following:The complainant (O.P. No. 2) purchased a medium goods vehicle of Eicher at the price of Rs. 5,05,000/- pursuant to execution fry her of a hire purchase agreement with M/s. Kotak Mahindra Finance Ltd. which financed a sum of Rs. 4,35,000/- on condition that...
Saraf Enterprises Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-20-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)CHN164
Amit Talukdar, J.1. Keeping in mind the nature of the prayer made in this application and the proposed order to be passed, this Court is of the considered view that the application can be disposed of even at this stage without issuance of notice.2. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 9.2.2007 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 6th Court, Kolkata in Case No. C/2304 of 2005 whereby the petition of complaint preferred by the present petitioner was dismissed within the scope of Section 203 Cr. PC, this application has been taken up on various grounds.3. Upon hearing the submissions of the learned Advocate for the petitioner and considering the tenor of the order passed, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned order cannot be sustained for the following reasons:(1) A plain reading of the petition of complaint, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the trial, shows that for the components of the offence complained of for what it is of worth not to have been disca...
Amar Pal and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-19-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)CHN822,2007CriLJ4150
ORDERS.P. Talukdar, J.1. The opposite party No. 2 I herein, Sutapa Pal, submitted a written complaint dated 9-10-2000 before the Inspector-in-Charge, Barasat Police Station, District-24-Parganas (North).2. She claimed that after her marriage with petitioner No. 1, Amar Kumar Pal on 19-4-1998. she started living with her husband and his parents at her matrimonial home.3. During her stay, much was said about the insufficiency of the dowry given at the time of the said marriage. There had been consistent demands in this regard. Times without number, she was subjected to humiliation and mental and physical torture during such stay. There had been such incidents on 27-12-1998, 21-1-1999. 7-3-1999 and 22-3-1999. Being unable to bear with such consistent torture by her husband and his parents, she had to take shelter at her parents place.4. On 22-3-1999, she was escorted to her husband's place by her parents, but was not received well. This was repeated on 31st March, 1999. She was again subj...
Kamal Parekh and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-19-2007
Reported in: (2007)3CALLT251(HC)
Sailendra Prasad Talukdar, J.1. The petitioner, Kaml Parekh, by filing the instant application under Section 482 of the Cr.PC sought for quashing of the charge-sheet dated 8.6.06 arising out the Hare Street P.S. Case No. G/DD No. 476 dated 24.9.02 under Sections 1260B/420/409/468/471/477A IPC as against him.2. The backdrop of the present case may briefly be stated as follows:On the basis of police enquiry an FIR was registered under Sections 120B/420/409/468/471/477A IPC on 24th September, 2002 against the Indus Ind Bank and 15 other brokers. In 2001 the petitioner was Honorary President of the Calcutta Stock Exchange and had resigned on 30.3.01. The Finance Ministry action taken report (ATR) 2004 tabled in Parliament in December 2004, debunks SHCIL- Biyani nexus in the rolling settlement transactions. On 10th January, 2003 the respondent under mala fide intention arrested the petitioner who was bailed out on 15th July, 2003. There was no allegation against the petitioner either in the...
Yuvraj Agarwal and anr. Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-19-2007
Reported in: [2007(115)FLR777]
Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. The petitioners are questioning the orders of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner dated June 17th, 2005 and July 14th, 2005 made under Section 7A and 8F; respectively of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. By the 7A order the authority determined the dues payable by the establishment of the petitioners on account of contributions and interest at Rs. 3071717/- and Rs. 664892/- respectively. Though the order under Section 7A was appealable, the petitioners did not prefer any appeal.2. Since they did not pay the determined dues, the authority issued the attachment order dated July 14th, 2005 ordering the bank concerned to pay Rs. 37,36,609/-. The writ petition was taken out on July 16th, 2005. By order dated August 12th, 2005 the petitioners were permitted to pay the amount mentioned in the attachment order in instalments. They were directed to set apart a sum of Rs. 10 lakh in a nationalized bank, and the authority was gi...
Dover Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of West Ben ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-18-2007
Reported in: (2007)3CALLT522(HC),2007(3)CHN508
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. These two mandamus appeals were heard together as the appeals are preferred against the self-same judgment passed by the learned Single Judge.2. The appellant in F.M.A. No. 732 of 2007 filed a writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the learned Single Judge thereby praying for a mandamus directing the respondent No. 3, the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Kolkata Metropolitan Area Housing, to implement its earlier decision dated March 15, 2002 by which the said respondent No. 3 directed the respondent No. 7, the Co-operative Housing Society of which the appellant was previously a member, to return a sum of Rs. 59,175/- received by the respondent No. 7 as a condition of grant of permission to transfer the membership of the writ petitioner to a third party.3. The writ petition was contested by the respondent No. 7, the Co-operative Housing Society, contending that the writ petitioner voluntarily paid the said amount and...
Ainul Haque and ors. Vs. State of W.B. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-18-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)CHN35
Dipankar Datta, J.1. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 24.4.2007 passed by the Chairperson, Bankura Municipality. By the said order, complaint lodged by the petitioners was disposed of in purported compliance with the order passed by Justice Jyotirmay Bhattacharya on 6.11.2006 in W.P. No. 20047(W) of 2006, thereby permitting the private respondents to raise construction in the manner mentioned in it.2. The petitioners along with some others had moved W.P. No. 20047(W) of 2006 raising a grievance that their complaint in relation to unauthorized construction being raised by the private respondents had not been considered by the Bankura Municipality. The said writ petition was disposed of by His Lordship with a direction upon the Municipality to consider the grievance of the petitioners as contained in their complaint by passing a reasoned order after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioners as well as the private respondents within four weeks from date...
Sadhu Ram Ruidas Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-18-2007
Reported in: (2007)3CALLT472(HC)
1. We have heard Mr. Goswami for the petitioner and Mr. Sen, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the State and we have also gone through the impugned order and have examined the statement and averments made in the application made before the learned Tribunal. We are of the view that the learned Tribunal has not fallen in error in not entertaining the petitioner's application though the petitioner has stated in the petition that order impugned has been passed without serving any notice and defying the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge concerned.2. According to Mr. Goswami, learned Tribunal ought to have entertained the application having regard to the facts and circumstances made out in the application. Mr. Sen has drawn our attention to Section 10 of the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal Act, 1997 which is quoted as under:10. Application to Tribunal.-(1) Subject to the provisions of Section 6 and other provisions of this Act, a person aggrieved by any order passed ...
State of West Bengal and ors. Vs. Samir Ghosh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-15-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)CHN744
1. Heard the learned Advocate appearing for the parties. The very nature of the stay application is such that in adjudicating the same, the entire appeal could be decided.2. In that view, we are treating the appeal as on day's list. Appeal and the application both are taken up for hearing.3. All formalities are dispensed with.4. All parties are appearing before us.5. The judgment dated 27th October, 2006 passed by the learned Trial Judge in W.P. No. 1498 of 2006 is the subject-matter of the appeal whereby and whereunder the learned Trial Judge directed consideration of the application praying for route permit in the route Salap to Science City but with rider that such application shall not be rejected by referring the Division Bench judgment passed in the case of Sujata Ganguly and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Ors. registered as F.M.A. No. 604 of 2004 and/or on the ground of notification dated 6th August, 2004, whereby and whereunder a total embargo was imposed so far as allowing a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »