Kolkata Court September 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.
Natvar Parikh Industries Limited and anr. Vs. Board of Trustees for th ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-21-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)CHN198
1. The appellants above named were the writ petitioners who filed the writ petition on or about 23rd July, 1997 prayed for amongst other reliefs:(b) Writ do issue in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents port authorities to provide the services which they have undertaken to do in the port in accordance with the procedure laid down by them and to arrange for destuffing the cargo and to release the said containers list of which is described in Annexure 'B' hereto;(c) Declaration that the port authorities are not entitled to charge any demurrage till the date of release of the said containers.2. Thereafter owing to subsequent development in view of passing of orders by this Court and consequently sale of the goods as stated hereinafter the writ petition was amended praying for amongst other reliefs:(b-1) A writ of and/or in the nature of mandamus do issue commanding the respondents and each one of them to sell the said cargo of urea forthwith and to pay all the amounts spent b...
Chairman, Board of Trustees for the Port of Kolkata and anr. Vs. Iftik ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-21-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)CHN516
1. This application has arisen in connection with an appeal preferred by the petitioner/appellant from an order dated 11th September, 2006 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in CAN No. 6823 of 2006 arising out of W.P. No. 3497(W) of 2006 for stay of operation of the impugned order. The order impugned was passed on the application filed by the appellant for modification of an earlier order dated 20th February, 2006 passed by the same learned Single Judge. By the order impugned the learned Single Judge has passed order slightly modifying earlier order to the extent to direct the respondent No. 8 to furnish an unconditional bank guarantee for a sum of Rs. 30,50,000/- within a period of fortnight from the date of passing of the order. Upon deposit of the said bank guarantee the applicant Board shall allow the petitioner to remove the logs. For the said purpose the Board shall take all steps including demolition of the brick wall, if any, which is standing in the way of removing...
Bikash Roy Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-21-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)CHN554
Dipankar Datta, J.1. Since these writ petitions involve common questions of fact law, they have been heard together and would be governed by this common judgment and order.2. Bikash Roy [petitioner in W.P. No. 23766 (W) of 2006] claims to be the owner of Plot No. 937, Khatian No. 1853, Mouza Naul, Police Station Shyampur in the district of Howrah while Ashim Mondal and two others [petitioners in W.P. No. 23765 (W) of 2006] claim to be owners of Plot No. 937, Khatian Nos. 1858, 1851 and 1857 respectively within the same mouza as aforesaid. It is their claim that their names have been recorded in the records of right and they are paying rent to the Government in respect thereof.3. It is the further claim of the petitioners that originally the plots belonged to one Nalini Prakash Ghoshal and the private respondent in both the petitions, viz. Shyam Charan Prodhan was the bargadar.4. It has been brought to the notice of this Court that a proceeding had been initiated before the Block Land a...
Government of West Bengal Vs. Chatterjee Petrochem (Mauritius) Co. and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-21-2007
Reported in: [2008]143CompCas837(Cal)
Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. In these four appeals filed under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 an order of the Company Law Board, Principal Bench, New Delhi, dated January 31, 2007 See Chatterjee Petrochem (Mauritius) Co. v. Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd. [2008] 143 Comp Cas 726. disposing of C.P. No. 58 of 2005, giving twenty one directions, has been questioned ; and hence they with the eight cross-objections have been heard together, and all are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The company petition under Sections 397, 398, 399, 402, 403 and 406 of the Companies Act, 1956 was filed by (1) Chatterjee Petrochem (Mauritius) Co., (2) Winstar India Investment Co. Ltd., (3) India Trade (Mauritius) Ltd, and (4) Chatterjee Petrochem (India) P. Ltd., hereinafter referred to as 'the CP(M)C', 'Winstar', 'IT(M)L' and 'the CP(I)PL' respectively, and as 'the Chatterjee group' collectively. They all, except the CP(I)PL, were and still are shareholders of Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd., here...
Chandendra Kumar Debnath Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-21-2007
Reported in: (2008)3CALLT241(HC)
Pratap Kumar Ray, J.1. Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parties.2. This appeal has been preferred assailing the judgment and order dated 18th May, 2006 passed by the learned trial Judge in W.P. No. 20603 (W) of 2005, whereby and whereunder the learned trial Judge did not interfere with the matter, namely, deemed resignation from service as assailed in the writ application by the petitioner on the ground of alternative forum to agitate the grievance before the Appeal Committee, that is, the statutory appeal under the statute.3. Since the respondents, School Authority got no opportunity to file opposition of the said application, a direction was given to file, opposition to bring on record the material facts. The affidavit-in-opposition as filed be kept with the record.4. It is an admitted fact as it appears from the affidavit-in-opposition and the writ application that the writ petitioner/appellant, who was working as a Group-D staff in the Science Laboratory, due to his il...
Mukulika Das (Nee Saha) Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-21-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)CHN521
1. By this application the judgment and order dated 28th of September, 2006 passed by the learned Tribunal has been impugned. Kaushik Saha, the respondent No. 4 herein, has challenged the appointment of the applicant to the post of Gramin Daak Sevak Sub-Postmaster (in short GDSSPM) of the Pantihal Branch Post Office. Both the aforesaid candidates participated in the selection process but the respondent No. 4 was unsuccessful. There were a number of eligibility conditions for the candidates for qualifying themselves for participation in the selection process. The relevant conditions are as follows:(i) The applicant must have adequate means of income from an independent source other than the allowance drawn form the GDS post to maintain his livelihood. The candidate must possess landed property solely in his/her own name.(ii) The applicant should be able to offer suitable rent free accommodation for the purpose of functioning the post office at the post village.(iii) The candidate must h...
Md. Nurul Huda Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-21-2007
Reported in: 2008(3)CHN817
Ashim Kumar Roy, J.1. In this criminal revisional application the petitioner challenged the order dated January 9, 2007 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate in-charge, Suri, Birbhum, in connection with G.R. Case No. 65/05 arising out of Sadaipur Police Station Case No. 5/05 under Section 135 of the Electricity Act and under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code as well as prayed for quashing of the proceedings relating to the said case on the ground taking cognizance of an offence punishable under Section 135 of the Electricity Act on a chargesheet submitted by a police officer is illegal and without jurisdiction.2. So far as the impugned order dated January 9, 2007 is concerned, I find by that order the learned Magistrate fixed a date for supply of the copy as the same was not ready. The learned Advocate of the petitioner could not enlighten this Court on what ground the same has been challenged nor any illegality which vitiates the said order.3. The only point that has been...
Jayshree Tea and Industries Ltd. Vs. General Magnets Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-20-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)CHN629
S.S. Nijjar, C.J.1. We have heard the Counsel for the parties length.2. In this matter, the suit filed on 16lh of January, 2001 by the respondent/ plaintiff with the following prayers:(a) Decree for Rs. 38,47,824/- on account of rent for the months of April, 2000 to December, 2003 claimed in paragraph 17 hereof together with interest @ 8.33% per annum.(b) Declaration that the defendant is liable to pay rent @ Rs. 6/- per sq.ft. per month from April, 2000 onwards for a period of 10 years from April, 2000 and direction upon the defendant to make payments accordingly on account of rent for the go down described in Schedule 'A' hereto,(c) Alternatively decree for adjudication, determination and settlement of monthly rent in respect of the subject go down more fully stated in Schedule 'A' hereto and decree for such sum as may be determined by this Hon'ble Court for the period of 1'' April, 2000 onwards along with interest at the rate of 8.33% per annum from the dates such rent fall due;(d) ...
Sk. Rejaul @ Dalal Rejaul (In Jail) Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-20-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)CHN1018
Partha Sakha Datta, J.1. Leave is granted to correct the cause title.2. This criminal appeal has been directed against the judgment and order dated 30.6.07 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track 1st Court, Uluberia, Howrah convicting the appellant in Sessions Trial No. 17/04 under Section 25(1)(a) of Arms Act and under Section 14 of Foreigner's Act.3. The convict was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for five years on account of offence under Section 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act and also for five years with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- i.d. to suffer S.I. for one year on account of offence under Section 14 of the Foreigner's Act.4. The grounds of revision are that the learned Court below did not appreciate the fact and circumstances of the case. The learned Judge misread, misunderstood the evidence on record and while the learned Judge acquitted all other accused persons of the offence under Section 399/402 of IPC, he convicted the lone appellant of the charge under Section 25(1A)...
Tarak Nath Singh Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-18-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)CHN517
1. Assailing the judgment and order dated 6th September, 2007 passed by the learned Single Judge in AST No. 1313 of 2007, this appeal has been preferred at the instance of the writ petitioner and stay application has also been filed in connection with the said appeal.2. We have heard the learned Counsel of the respective parties in connection with the said appeal as well as the stay application.3. The writ petition filed by the appellant herein was finally disposed of by the learned Single Judge on 6th September, 2007 upon hearing the submissions of the respective parties whereby and whereunder the said learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the same lacks merit.4. Going through the judgment and order under appeal and also scrutinising the records, we find that the Chairman of the Champdani Municipality was removed pursuant to the resolution passed in the meeting of the Board of Councillors held on 20th August, 2007. The Vice-Chairman of the said Municipali...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »