Kolkata Court July 2008 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.
Director, Central Glass and Ceramic Research Institute and anr. Vs. Su ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2008
Reported in: AIR2008Cal251,2008(4)CHN188,[2008(119)FLR789]
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. The above application has been filed by the applicants against the order of summary dismissal of the original application of the applicant. It appears that the learned Tribunal entertained the application, however, did not grant any relief, observing in substance that there has been alternative remedy against unauthorized occupation by one of the retired employees, which can be availed of under the provision of Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act.2. Before us none appears for respondent, so it is contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the learned Tribunal should have entertained the application as the Tribunal of the Principal Bench at Delhi in past has entertained this kind of application and granted relief by passing appropriate order and it was also affirmed by the Hon'ble High Court at Delhi and in another matter in O.A. 2415 of 1989 in past this kind of application was also tested its maintainability, successfully r...
S.P.S. Metal Cast and Alloys Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2008
Reported in: (2008)3CALLT462(HC)
Aniruddha Bose, J.1. The petitioners herein, a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act 1956, were subjected to a proceeding initiated under the Central Excise Act 1944 on the allegation of wrongly availing MODVAT credit. Initially a notice to show cause was issued to the petitioners to which they filed their response. Thereafter, an order was passed by the Joint Commissioner Central Excise, Bolpur (being the adjudicator authority), confirming a demand of Rs. 6,36,291.24. In the order, an equivalent sum as penalty in terms of Rule 571(4) of Central Excise Rules 1944 was imposed, along, with interest on the amount of credit disallowed. The petitioners preferred an appeal against the order but was unsuccessful before the appellate authority, being the Commissioner, Central Excise (Appeals), Kolkata-IV. At the admission stage of the appeal and the petition for stay of operation of the order of the adjudicatory authority, the principal amount held to be due was direct...
Bhumendranath Guharay Vs. General Manager, Calcutta Telephones and ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)CHN534
S.P. Talukdar, J.1. The petitioner approached this Court with the prayer for restraining the respondent/Calcutta Telephones from disconnecting his residential telephone with the then number 37-2708 since re-numbered 359-0439 and presumably, must have been re-numbered again. This was over alleged non-payment of bills of cycles 1, 3 and 5 of 1993.2. Heard learned Counsel, Mr. Mukherjee, appearing for the petitioner who referring to the factual backdrop of the present case submits that the writ petitioner was subscriber of a particular telephone which was a domestic connection. Inviting attention of the Court to the copies of the various bills annexed to the writ application, it is submitted that ordinarily over a protracted period of time, the writ petitioner was receiving bill for the amount of Rs. 500/- and around in respect of that particular telephone.3. It is then alleged that to the utter shock and surprise of the writ petitioner, he suddenly received a bill for an abnormally high ...
Tara Properties Private Limited Vs. Shalimar Paints Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2008
Reported in: (2008)IVCALLT296(HC)
Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. In this suit instituted on May 31st, 1984 the plaintiff is seeking decrees for recovery of possession of the suit property, for damages by way of past mesne profits amounting to Rs. 2,74,954.69 upto May 10th, 1984, and for damages or future mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 3,872.60 per day with interest till delivery of vacant possession of the suit property, or alternatively for a decree for the sum determined upon enquiry into mesne profits or damages with interest.2. By Ex E, a registered instrument dated March 4th, 1963, the ground floor office accommodation having a carpet area measuring 5806 sq. ft. at 13 Camac Street, Kolkata was leased out by the plaintiff to the defendant for non-residential purpose for a period of 21 years with effect from March 1st, 1963 at a monthly rent of Rs. 7,257.50. The lease was to expire on February 29th, 1984. By Ex A, lawyer's letter dated December 14th, 1983, the plaintiff, while reminding the defendant that by efflux of...
Soumen Kumar Kar and ors. Vs. Swapan Kumar Kar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-14-2008
Reported in: AIR2008Cal213,2008(4)CHN859
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. The above appeal has been filed by the plaintiffs/appellants being dissatisfied with the judgment and decree passed by the learned Trial Judge in Title Suit No. 173 of 1988 refusing to pass preliminary decree in respect of one of the four suit properties namely premises No. D-642 Lake Gardens, Calcutta (hereinafter referred to as the said suit properties). The appellants/plaintiffs brought the said suit in the 3rd Court of Assistant District Judge at Alipore against as many as 12 persons. Besides the suit property premises No. 162/8/1 Lake Garden, Kolkata now renumbered as D-620 Lake Gardens Kolkata, and 135 shares in the joint stock company known as R. Cambray & Company Private Limited and 150 shares in the joint stock company having its registered office at premises No. P-33 Mission Row Extension in the town of Calcutta are also subject-matter of the suit. Sum and substance of the case made out in the plaint is that the plaintiffs and the defendants are ma...
Arijit Mittra Vs. Goutam Mitter
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-14-2008
Reported in: AIR2008Cal273
ORDERBiswanath Somadder, J.1. Heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the parties.2. This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India primarily directed against an order, being Order No. 83, dated 28th February, 2008, passed by the 4th Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Alipore, South 24 Parganas in Title Suit No. 144 of 1997.3. The petitioner herein is the substituted defendant No. 1 (b) in the suit pending in the Court below.4. From the record it appears that the plaintiff filed an application before the learned Court below under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying for rejection of the application of the substituted defendant. The substituted defendant, in his application, had inter alia prayed for time to file written statement and for an early date for further hearing of the suit.5. It further appears from record that an objection to the said application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed by the substituted defen...
Asok Kumar Pal Vs. Smt. Sawan Pal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-2008
Reported in: (2008)3CALLT437(HC)
Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J.1. Two proceedings are continuing side by side. One of such proceedings which is initiated on the complaint of the wife/opposite party against her husband under Sections 498A/406/120B of the Indian Penal Code, is now pending for consideration before the learned 1st Court of Judicial Magistrate at Sealdah. The other proceeding is a suit for divorce which was also filed by the wife/opposite party against her husband on the ground of cruelty under Section 13(I)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act. Both the aforesaid proceedings were thus, initiated at the instance or the wife/opposite party. First of such proceedings was the criminal proceeding which was filed by the wife, as aforesaid. The civil suit for divorce was filed subsequently. The allegations constituting 'cruelty', on which the criminal proceeding was initiated, are the allegations on which the Civil Suit was also founded.2. There is no disagreement between the parties on the issue that the similar set of fa...
Chittaranjan Si Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-2008
Reported in: (2009)1CALLT140(HC),2008(4)CHN260
Soumitra Pal, J.1. The petitioner, the first life member has challenged the action of the Additional District inspector of schools (S.E) Contai Sub-Division, Purba Medinipur, respondent No. 5 in nominating the respondent No. 9 to represent the next Managing Committee (for short 'the Committee').2. The facts in brief are: that in the year 1995 the petitioner had donated a sum of Rs. 20,000/- and by a memo No. 578 dated 20th October, 1995 was accepted as the second life member of the school. Subsequently, the petitioner became the sole life member. On 30th April, 2004 the respondent No. 8 was accepted as a life member. On 20th April, 2005 the Committee of the school was reconstituted. The respondent No. 8 represented the Committee from the category of life member. On 21st September, 2007 the respondent No. 9 was accepted as a life member. Thereafter, in accordance with law, pursuant to the elections held in the month of January/February, 2008 the Committee was reconstituted. By memo date...
Tarun Das and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)CHN164
Arunabha Basu, J.1. The revisional application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed to quash the proceeding in connection with G.R. Case No. 60 of 2007 arising out of Bantra Police Station Case No. 3 of 2007, now pending before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Howrah.2. In this case after conclusion of investigation, chargesheet is submitted against the petitioners for commission of offence punishable under Section 493/420/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.3. Opposite party No. 2 filed a petition of complaint before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Howrah against five accused persons (accused Sabita Das is non-petitioner in this revisional application).4. The direction was passed by the learned Court below for registration of the case and to initiate investigation in terms of provision under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.5. The allegation against the petitioners mainly rests on the ground that there was lov...
Bijay Kumar Bhattar Vs. Trimurti Associates Pvt. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)CHN585
Arunabha Basu, J.1. The revisional application under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the judgement and order dated 29.1.2008 passed by learned Chief Judge, City Sessions Court, Calcutta In connection with Criminal Revision No. 111 of 2007, whereby and whereunder the learned Sessions Judge affirmed the order dated 30.3.2007 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 11th Court, Calcutta.2. A complaint case bearing No. C/313 of 1996 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is pending before the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate.3. Petitioner is arrayed as accused in connection with the said case.4. It appears that initially the opposite party No. 1, which is the company, was represented by one Pawan Kumar Agarwal but an application was filed before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate on 21.11.2006 whereby a prayer for substitution was made. It was stated that one Vinay Kumar Gupta may be permitted to substitute the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »