Kolkata Court May 2009 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.
Sk. AlauddIn @ Ala and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ3138
Partha Sakha Datta, J.1. The three appellants, namely Sk. Alauddin @ Ala, Sk. Nasim and Asraful Mallick @ Laltu preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 26-9-2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. III at Rampurhat in the district of Birbhum whereby the three appellants were sentenced to suffer R. I. for 7 years each with a fine of Rs. 5000/- each in default to suffer further R. I. for 6 months each on account of the offence under Section 393 read with Section 34 IPC.2. Mr. Uday Sankar Chattarjee appears for the appellant Sk. Alauddin @ Ala, but it appears that Memo of Appeal was filed by three appellants jointly. Though none appears for the other two appellants, submissions of Mr. Uday Sankar Chatterjee covers all the three appellants because all the three appellants stand on the same footing and there was not a single submission or argument that can only isolate Sk. Alauddin @ Ala from the other two appellants. Accordingly appearan...
Gopal Ghosh (In Jail) Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-12-2009
Reported in: 2010CriLJ485
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. The above appeal before us is for reversal of judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bankura dated 22nd September, 2003 in Sessions Trial No. 3 of 2001 and Sessions Case No. 1 of 2000. By this judgment the appellant has been sentenced to Suffer imprisonment for life and also pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default to suffer imprisonment for three months, under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code (in short the I. P. C).2. The aforesaid trial was initiated with lodging of complaint by the appellant himself on the basis of which FIR was drawn up. Thereafter in course of investigation it was suspected reasonably by the I. O. that the appellant himself was the offender. Therefore, after completion of investigation charge-sheet was submitted, arraigning the appellant under Section 302 of the I. P. C. for committing murder of his daughter namely, Milli/the prosecution case, in short, is as follows:On 12th October, 1997 at about 3.05 a.m. ...
Narendra Gudgud Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (Eow)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-06-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ4278
ORDERPartha Sakha Datta, J.1. The petitioner who is an accused in Special Case No. 02 of 2001 under Section 120B read with Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 13(1)(d) and Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 pending before the learned Judge, 3rd Special Court, CBI at Calcutta resides at New York, USA. Since his appearance could not be secured for his trial the learned Judge, 3rd Special Court, CBI wrote a letter being No. 20 dated 9th March, 2007 to the competent authority. Department of Justice, United States of America through the Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi and the Interpol Wing, CBI, Government of India, New Delhi requesting for extradition of the petitioner from USA to India for trial. Against the extradition memo issued by the learned trial Court, the petitioner made an application before the learned Court for recalling the same. The ground was that extradition memo was based upon issuance of non-b...
He-man Ductile Irons Ltd. and anr. Vs. Cesc Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-06-2009
Reported in: AIR2009Cal272
Surinder Singh Nijjar, C.J.1. Aggrieved against the judgment of the learned single Judge dated 23-12-2008 the petitioners have filed the present letters patent appeal. By the aforesaid common judgment the learned single Judge has dismissed writ petition No. 687 of 2003 and allowed writ petition No. 1265 of 2006. The petitioner is an industrial consumer of electricity supplied by respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to CICSC Limited). Petitioners received a notice dated 20th of September, 2001 from CESC Limited alleging tampering with the seals of the meter and demanding a sum of Rs. 14,20,102.40 paise on account of unmetered illegal consumption of power. The petitioners challenged the aforesaid notice in W. P. No. 1903 of 2001. By an order dated 25th of September, 2001, the Court appointed an advocate and an electrical inspector to be appointed by the Chief Electrical Inspector, as Special Officers to visit the factory premises and file separate reports as to whether the meter bears ...
State of West Bengal Vs. Kajal Sarkar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-05-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ3250
Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay, J.1. The appeal filed by Kajal Sarkar against his conviction and death sentence was registered as Criminal Appeal No. 262 of 2008. The other convicts preferred the appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 263 of 2008. The reference seeking confirmation of sentence of death was registered as Death Reference I of 2008. Both the appeals and the Death Reference arise out of the judgment passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-Ill, Krishnanagar, Nadia in Sessions Trial No. HI (Sep) of 2005 arising out of Sessions Case No. 91(2) of 2005.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that one Ratan Sarkar lodged a written complaint before the Officer-in-charge, Taherpur R.O.P. on 17th March, 2004 where it was stated that his cousin sister, Gouri Sarkar got married with Kajal Sarkar, son of Dilip Sarkar residing at 'C' Block, Rasta No. 17, P.O. Taherpur under P.S. Ranaghat before one year as per Hindu rites. It was alleged in the said written complaint that...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Rekha Dutta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-04-2009
Reported in: 2009ACJ2694
Bhaskar Bhattacharya and Tapan Kumar Dutt, JJ.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 insurance company and is directed against an award dated 11.8.2008 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and the Judge, Second Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta in M.J.C. Case No. 44 of 1986 thereby awarding compensation of Rs. 1,96,490 with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from the date of award till actual payment against the insurance company.3. Being dissatisfied, appellant insurance company has come up with the present appeal.4. At the very outset, Mr. Singh, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant, assiduously contended before us that the learned Tribunal erred in law in holding that his client admitted that the vehicle was covered by the insurance at the relevant point of time by totally overlooking the fact that para 7 of the written statement...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›