Kolkata Court June 2008 Judgments
Himangshu Das and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-30-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)CHN737
1. This application has been filed in connection with the appeal preferred from the order dated February 8, 2008 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby and whereundcr the said learned Single Judge finally disposed of the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner/respondent.2. By the aforesaid order under appeal, learned Single Judge finally disposed of the writ petition by directing the District Magistrate, North 24-Parganas to look into the allegations made on behalf of the writ petitioner and also directed the said District Magistrate to take certain measures including initiation of legal proceedings.3. Undisputedly, the aforesaid order was passed by the learned Single Judge on the very first day after filing of the writ petition and in absence of the respondents. The learned Single Judge also recorded the submissions of the learned Counsel of the writ petitioner that notice was given to the respondents.4. Going through the records of the Writ Court, we do not find any document ...
Tag this Judgment!Haranath Chatterjee Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-30-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)CHN122,2008CriLJ4169
Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.1. One Mobarak Mia along with his wife boarded down from a truck in front of a cycle repairing shop belonging to one Ashim Chatterjee in Rampurhat in the district of Birbhum on May 25, 1982. As soon as Mobarak and his wife came down from the truck the accused Haranath caught hold of Mobarak and snatched Rs. 238/- from his possession and started assaulting him. To save himself Mobarak took shelter in the shop room of Ashim. Haranath started destroying the shop. Ashim requested Mobarak to leave the shop which he did. Ashim then closed his shop and went to his house. He, however, came out from his house on an alarm raised by a minor boy that his shop was set on fire. He along with the Headmaster of the local school Lakshman Chandra Saha went to the place of occurrence and found his shop being burnt out. In the process his adjoining shop belonging to Adinath Dutta was also burnt. On a query made by him he came to know (that) Haranath Chatterjee set his shop on fire....
Tag this Judgment!Karamchand Thapar and Bros (Coal Sales) Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of Ind ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-30-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)CHN998
Soumitra Pal, J.1. Affridavit-of-service filed in Court today be kept on records.2. In the writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 11th June, 2008 passed on the Stay Petition No. SP 314/07 arising out of Service Tax Appeal No. 30/07 on the ground that the order of the learned Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') is perverse as it did not consider the judgment and order dated 12th June, 2006 passed by the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of the appellant itself wherein full waiver of pre-deposit of service tax and penalty were granted. Moreover, the Tribunal did not consider the case of Naresh Kumar & Co. v. Commissioner of Service Tax, Kolkata in M.A. 426 of 2006, and S.P. No. 616 of 2006 where in a similar matter it had directed stay of pre-deposit of tax and penalty interest imposed on the appellant therein. Submission has been made that the averments made in the application for stay partic...
Tag this Judgment!Subodh Kumar Mittra Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-27-2008
Reported in: (2008)3CALLT236(HC),[2008(119)FLR28]
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. The instant application has questioned the judgment and order of the learned Tribunal dated 14th November. 2007 by which the applicant's challenge against order of transfer has been disallowed. The applicant, at present, is a Superintending Archaeologist and at the time of moving the application before the learned Tribunal he was posted at Kolkata Circle. By an Office Order No. 106/2007-ADM. 1 dated 31st July, 2007 signed by section Officer; (Administration) the petitioner has been transferred from Kolkata to Nagpur. The petitioner joined at Kolkata Circle on 11th July, 2006 pursuant to earlier order of transfer. According to the petitioner, the petitioner in Kolkata has undertaken major archaeological works and the said work is in the midst of completion. In performing this work he is responsible for analysing, estimating and framing several important conservation works of Viswa Bharati University at Santiniketan and he has also completed the civil deposit ...
Tag this Judgment!Puspita Maity Ailas Puspita Jana Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-27-2008
Reported in: (2008)3CALLT550(HC),2008CriLJ4630
Ashim Kumar Roy, J.1. Aggrieved by an order passed by the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate. Contai, Purba Medinipore in connection with G.R. (E) Case No. 68 of 2007, arising out of Patashpur Police Station Case No. 17 of 2007 under Sections 363/366/366A/368/34 of the Indian Penal Code rejecting the prayer of the present petitioner, the victim girl for her release on personal bond she moved the instant criminal revisional application.The present petitioner being allegedly kidnapped by the accused Pradip Kumar Jana and two others out of keeping of her lawful guardian without their consent, a complaint was lodged to the police by her father Pradip Kumar Maity, whereupon the Patashpur Police Station Case No. 17 of 2007 under Sections 363/366/366A/368/34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the petitioner and two others and same gave rise to G.R. (E) Case No. 68 of 2007 and is now pending before the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Contai, Purba Medinipor...
Tag this Judgment!Atish Agarwala and ors. Vs. the State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-27-2008
Reported in: (2008)IVCALLT82(HC),2008(4)CHN394
Ashim Kumar Roy, J.1. Invoking the provisions of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioners herein who are happened to be the husband and the relations of the husband, moved the instant criminal revision for quashing of the G.R. Case No. 525/07 now pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Serampore, Hooghly arising out of Rishra Police Station Case No. 42/07 under Sections 498A/406 of the Indian Penal Code on the ground that all disputes between the parties, which are purely in matrimonial disputes have been amicably settled out of Court and they are no longer interested to proceed against each other in a Court of law.2. Mr. Phiroze Edulji, the learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted before this Court that the petitioner No. 1 is the husband of the opposite party No. 2, whereas the remaining three petitioners are his relations. He further submitted following some matrimonial disputes, a complaint in writing being lod...
Tag this Judgment!Md. MohiuddIn Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-27-2008
Reported in: [2008(119)FLR18],(2009)ILLJ112Cal
ORDER1. The judgment and order of the learned State Administrative Tribunal dated May 13, 2002 has been challenged by this application. The learned Tribunal rejected the petitioner's claim of back wages for the period during which he remained discharged from services and upto the date of reinstatement, namely, commencing from January 30,1989 to October 1,1993.2. The fact of the case leading to bringing action by the applicant is shortly put hereunder:3. The petitioner on or about August 2,1988 was appointed probationary Police Constable and after completion of his training and joining duty he was discharged by an order dated January 30,1989. The above order of discharge was challenged by filing a writ petition and he was successful therein by obtaining an order of reinstatement on September 13, 1991. The order of reinstatement was passed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahitosh Majumdar (as His Lordship then was) on September 30,1991 not unconditionally or absolutely but liberty was given to th...
Tag this Judgment!Bhupen Purakait Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-27-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)CHN78
S.P. Talukdar, J.1. Grievances raised in the present writ application may briefly be stated as follows:On being approached by the writ petitioner, the respondent No. S/ICICI Bank advanced loan for an amount of Rs. 6,68,000/- on 7.2.2007. The writ petitioner was made to sign some blank papers and printed forms for getting his loan duly processed and sanctioned. He purchased the vehicle being No. WB-41C-4398 at a price of Rs. 7, 72,349/-. He got discount of Rs. 30,000/- thus, requiring to pay an amount of Rs. 7,42,349/-. He made down payment of Rs. 74,349/- and the aforesaid amount of Rs. 6,68,000/- was granted as loan. The petitioner was duly paying instalments at the rate of Rs:15,126/- but due to severe ailment of his wife, there had been interruption. He was served with a demand notice dated 30th June, 2007 whereby respondent/ICICI Bank asked for payment of Rs. 11,786/- only. The vehicle was picked up from the route on 18'' August, 2007 by hired muscleman of such respondent No. 5. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Kanoria Jute and Industries Ltd. Sangrami Shramik Union and anr. Vs. A ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-27-2008
Reported in: [2009]149CompCas555(Cal)
Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. In these writ petitions two orders one dated December 31, 2002, made by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (in short 'the BIFR') established under the provisions of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, and the other dated July 20, 2005, made by the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (in short 'the AAIFR') constituted also under the provisions of the same Act have been questioned.2. On receipt of a reference made by Kanoria Jute and Industries Ltd., 2 under Section 15 of the Act, the BIFR registered the requisite proceedings on September 15, 1987. From time to time it made orders with a view to exploring the possibility of revival of the company. Ultimately, it came to the conclusion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending. It noticed that the promoters who were before it were dragging the proceedings. Under the circumstances, by the order dated December 31, 2...
Tag this Judgment!Chinu Rani Balo and ors. Vs. National Insurance Co Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-27-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ935
1. Instead of disposal of the application, we propose to hear out the appeal itself by treating it as on day's list.2. This appeal is at the instance of the claimants and is directed against an award dated 2.4.2005 passed by learned Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Uttar Dinajpur in M.A.C. Case No. 159 of 2003 by which the learned Tribunal disposed of an application under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act by awarding a sum of Rs. 1,60,000 as compensation.3. Being dissatisfied, the appellants have come up with the present appeal.4. There is no dispute that the victim died of a motor cycle accident. According to the appellants, he was a mason and used to earn Rs. 3,000 a month.5. The learned Tribunal below accepted the cause of death of the victim that his death arose out of an accident and that the offending vehicle was covered by the insurance.6. However, for arriving at the figure of compensation, he decided to apply the multiplier of 16, notwithstanding the fact that the...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »