Kolkata Court July 2008 Judgments
Brindaban Bag Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-31-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ4275
ORDER PASSED BY THE COURT BELOW:(i) The incident was proved beyond doubt through the evidence of PW-3, 4, 5 and 11. Assault was proved through the Doctor being PW-13.(ii) Dr. M. K. Moitra who held post-mortem examination had expired prior to the holding of the trial. Hence, the post-mortem report could not be proved. However, non-filing of the death certificate of Dr. Moitra would not vitiate the entire proceeding. The post-mortem report could have taken in evidence under Section 34 of the Evidence Act by proving the hand writing and signature of Dr. Moitra. However, due to laches on the part of the prosecution the same was not done.(iii) There was ample evidence on record that on the day of Bijoya Dashami in 1982 Nakul was murdered. Such fact was proved through the local witnesses.(iv) The concerned constable proved that he had identified the dead body before Dr. Moitra at the time of post-mortem examination. Hence, the contention of the defence that the death was not proved, was reje...
Tag this Judgment!Glaxosmithkline Consumer Healthcare Ltd. Vs. Abbott Healthcare Pvt. Lt ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-31-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)CHN344,LC2009(1)407,2009(40)PTC437(Cal)
Sanjib Banerjee, J.1. The plaintiff founds this action in passing off on the first defendant allegedly copying the plaintiffs slogan in the second-last frame of the plaintiffs television commercial relating to its Horlicks health food drink powder. The plaintiff says that the slogan being the most prominent feature of its commercial, which is also the theme used in danglers and other promotional material used by the plaintiff, it has come to be so exclusively associated with the plaintiffs product that any form of imitation thereof by any other person would amount to deceit for filching the trade and trading upon the goodwill of the plaintiff and its renowned product.2. There appears to be little doubt that the plaintiffs is a well-known product. The first defendant has not contested either the plaintiffs or its said product's reputation. The plaintiff shows - and there is no reason to disbelieve the plaintiff - that it has expended several tens of crores in its advertisement campaign ...
Tag this Judgment!V.C. Dialani Alias Vijay Kumar Chellaram Dialani and anr. Vs. Lakshmi ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-31-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)CHN176
Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.1. The Inland Waterways Authority of India is a body under the Ministry of Shipping, Government of India. It was established on October 27, 1986. On August 26, 1992 the appellant authority framed seniority-cum-promotion/recruitment regulation being Inland Waterways Authority of India (Recruitment, Seniority and Promotion) Regulation, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said regulation of 1992'). Under the said regulation of 1992 the post of Assistant Director was to be filled up 50% by promotion and 50% by transfer on deputation failing which by direct recruitment. On January 19, 1995 the respondent No. 1 was appointed in the post of Technical Assistant as a direct recruit. Since he was a diploma engineer as per the regulation of 1992 so amended in 1993 he became entitled to be considered for promotion in the post of Assistant Director after five years experience in the feeder post. Thus he was entitled to be considered for promotion on or after January 19, 20...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Satish Chandra Upadhyay and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-30-2008
Reported in: (2008)IVCALLT51(HC)
1. By a common judgment and order dated 16th December 1997 the learned Tribunal has disposed of two matters, being O.A. 693 of 1996 and O.A. 942 of 1995. The parties are not concerned with O.A. 942 of 1995 since grievance, of the applicant, as mentioned, was redressed during pendency of the aforesaid matter. But the judgment and order, passed in O.A. 693 of 1995, has been assailed by Union of India as the learned Tribunal, by the aforesaid judgment and order, has given a declaration that the applicant, who is respondent before us, is deemed to have been appointed on ad hoc basis till he is regularised.2. The fact of the case is very short and simple. On and from August 1993 the applicant was appointed to the post of Engineer & Ship Survey in the General Services on ad-hoc basis on a pay of Rs. 3700/- per month in the scale of Rs. 3700-125-4700-150-5000. His appointment specifically was for a period of one year; with effect from the date he takes over charge of the post or till the date...
Tag this Judgment!India Media Services Private Limited Vs. Newsprint Trading and Sales C ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-30-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)CHN660
Sanjib Banerjee, J.1. The vicissitudes of the real estate market and the recent unabated trek of property prices due north have resulted in the substantial skirmishes between the principal dramatis personae here, including this present attempt to disentangle a valuable Hyderabad property that appears to have been parked beyond the reach of the third defendant under a consent decree.2. The third defendant has applied for rescission of the agreements of September 7, 2000 and June 12, 2002 and the consequential annulment of the consent decree of March 17, 2004 passed on the basis of the two agreements.3. The third and fourth defendants are engaged in the business of publication of newspapers. The fourth defendant is a subsidiary of the third defendant. The second defendant is a foreign concern and the first defendant is the Indian agent of the second defendant. The third and fourth defendants obtained supply of newsprint from the first and second defendants, were immediately unable to pay...
Tag this Judgment!Tapan Kumar Kundu Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-29-2008
Reported in: (2008)IVCALLT38(HC)
1. This application is directed against the judgment and order of the learned Central Administrative Tribunal dated 13th April 2005 whereby and whereunder the order of removal of the applicant from service has been upheld.2. The fact of the case for which the present proceedings was initiated is stated hereunder:The applicant, at the relevant time, was a Guard and he was booked for discharging his, duty as Guard on board the passenger train No. 18 NB and 17 NB from Bandel to Naihati and back. On or about 25th November 1998, he was charge sheeted under the Disciplinary Appeal Rules 1968 on the allegation of misconduct; summary of which is stated hereunder:On 13th November 1998, while he was booked to discharge his duty as Guard to board the passenger train No. 18 NB and 17 NB, he was not found on duty in the guard's cabin at Hooghly Ghat Station and in his place two unauthorised non-railwaymen, namely one Gobind Chandra Ghosh and one Toushik Khan, were in the Guard's cabin and performin...
Tag this Judgment!Ramendra Sundar Karmakar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-28-2008
Reported in: (2008)IVCALLT1(HC)
1. By this application, the applicant has challenged the judgment and order of the learned Tribunal dated 20th May, 2005, whereby the applicant's challenge against the order of punishment of reduction in rank has failed.2. The applicant, originally at the time of issuance of charge sheet, was holding the post of Sub-Divisional Inspector (P). He was charge sheeted on or about 15th February, 2002 on the ground of misconduct that while taking selection process for the purpose of Extra Departmental Delivery Agent, now re-designated as G.D.S. Mail Deliverer, he has selected certain candidates ignoring the claim of one Sukumar Patra who had obtained higher percentage of marks in Madhyamik Pariksha and thereby violated D.G. Posts Commn. No. 17-366/91-ED & Trg dated 12th March, 1993 and 17-108/94-ED & Trg. dated 14th December, 1994 and also 19-11/97-ED & Trg dated 27th November, 1997. By this selection he has shown lack of integrity and also acted in a manner unbecoming of a Government servant...
Tag this Judgment!Miss Sonali Kar Vs. D.i. of Schools (S.E.) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-28-2008
Reported in: (2008)IVCALLT251(HC)
Tapan Kumar Dutt, J.1. Heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties.2. The petitioner's case is that the petitioner's name was recommended by the West Bengal Regional School Service Commission (Southern Region) vide Memo dated 9th February, 2001 for the post of an Assistant Teacher in Nutrition at Giribala Sircar Balika Vidyalaya (Government Sponsored). By an order dated 14th February, 2002 the District Inspector of Schools (S.E) Calcutta, approved the appointment of the petitioner in the said post. It appears from the copy of the said Memo that the appointment of the petitioner was made in the said post in the category of Post-graduate Degree since the petitioner was a Post-Graduate (M.Sc. in Home Science ) with B.Ed. at that point of time.3. It further appears from annexure P-4 to the writ petition that the petitioner was granted a Registration No. 3486 Ph.D (Home Science) by the Calcutta University with effect from 25th February, 1998. On 20th November, 2000 the petitioner...
Tag this Judgment!Dewrance Macneill and Co. Ltd. (In Liquidation) Vs. Padam Kumar Khaita ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-28-2008
Reported in: [2010]97SCL236(Cal)
Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. The first respondent in CA No. 604 of 2004 has taken out this application by the Judge's summons dated 8-8-2007 for an order deleting his name from the array of respondents in CA No. 604 of 2004 and other consequential reliefs.2. CA No. 604 of 2004 is an application taken out by the Official Liquidator of this Court under Section 543 of the Companies Act, 1956 ('the Act') by the Judge's summons dated 1-10-2004. He took out the application initiating misfeasance proceedings against all the seven respondents named in the Judge's summons as the erstwhile directors of Dewrance Macneill & Co. Ltd., the company-in-liquidation. The winding up proceedings in which the winding up order dated 13-10-1999 was made by this Court had been initiated on the basis of an order of the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction ('BIFR') constituted under provisions of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985. The BIFR recommended that the company shoul...
Tag this Judgment!Ashim Kumar Dutta and ors. Vs. Swapan Dutta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-25-2008
Reported in: (2008)3CALLT283(HC)
Prabuddha Sankar Banerjee, J.1. This is an application under Order 47 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code filed by the present petitioners against the opposite parties with prayer for reviewing the order dated 17th May 2007 passed by this Court in connection with CO. No. 3180 of 2006.2. The said civil revision was filed by the present opposite parties against the present petitioners under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.3. The said revisional application was preferred by the defendants in T.S. No. 329 of 1981 which was pending before the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Purulia in connection with Title Suit No. 28 of 1981 against the plaintiffs who are petitioners in this review application. In that CO., the defendants challenged the order dated 20.7.2006 by which the application under Section 17(3) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act filed by the plaintiffs was allowed. The defendants in that case also prayed for permission to deposit the arrears of rent since Kartick...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »