Kolkata Court December 2010 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.
Nurul Huda Layek Vs. Yusuf Khan
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Dec-26-2010
1. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against an order dated 22nd June, 2010 passed by the State Consumers Disputes Redressal Commission in RP No. 52 of 2010 setting aside the order dated 18-03- 2010 passed by the District Consumer Redressal Forum, Kolkata Unit-I in CDF Case No. 137 of 2010 at the instance of the petitioner herein. 2. Heard Mr. Banerjee, Learned Advocate, appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Chatterjee, Learned Advocate for the opposite party. Considered the materials on record including the order impugned. 3. Let me now consider as to how far the Learned State Commission was justified in passing the impugned order in the facts of the instant case. A complaint case was initiated by the opposite party herein against the petitioner before the District Consumer Redressal Forum, Kolkata Unit-I. The said proceeding was registered as CDF case No. 137 of 2006. The petitioner was contesting the said complaint case by filing objection th...
The General Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and ors. Vs. Sri Sisi ...
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Dec-24-2010
1. This Mandamus-Appeal is at the instance of the Indian Oil Corporation and is directed against an order dated 13th July, 2010, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court, by which His Lordship disposed of a writ-application filed by a Dealer of the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. challenging the order of termination of the dealership by virtue of the order dated January 07, 2008 on the allegation of failure on his part to maintain the requisite standard in respect of Motor Spirits.2. By the said order, the learned Single Judge quashed the order of termination with liberty to the Indian Oil Corporation to conduct a fresh hearing after making available the opinion of the concerned Officer, if any, in not retesting the sample retained by the writ-petitioner. His Lordship also directed restoration of supply to the writ-petitioner with further direction of revoking the order of suspension within a period of three weeks from the date of supplying the certified copy of the order.3. Being di...
Sadhan Ranjan Banerjee Vs. Sri Binoy Krishna Banerjee and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-24-2010
1. The Court: - In the year 2000, to be precise in the month of February of the said year one Mr. Sadhan Ranjan Banerjee as the sole executor of a Will of Ms. Bakul Banerjee, since deceased, (testatrix in short) dated 26 July 1994 applied for probate of the said Will by filing an application in this Court, P.L.A. No. 94 of 2000. After the initiation of the probate proceedings, pursuant to the order of this Court citation was issued and served upon the legal heirs of the testatrix. Two out of the three brothers of the testatrix applied for condonation of delay in lodging the caveat with certain other prayers and the said application was allowed and the applicants were given two days within which the caveat was to be lodged in the probate proceedings. Two brothers of the testatrix, thereafter, lodged their caveat in order to contest the probate proceedings. 2. The executor of the said Will, thereafter, applied for discharge of the said caveat and grant of probate in his favour. The said...
Bisha Lakshi Mata Thakurani, Represented by Sebait, Sri Tapas Kumar Ka ...
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Dec-24-2010
1. This application is at the instance of the plaintiff and is directed against the order dated August 24, 2005 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Second Court, Diamond Harbour in Title Suit No.319 of 1999 thereby rejecting an application under Section 17(2) & 17(2A) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956.2. The short fact is that the plaintiff instituted a suit for recovery of possession of the suit property, as described in the schedule of the plaint, against the defendant/opposite party on the ground default, reasonable requirement, damages, etc. In that suit, the defendant appeared and filed an application under Section 17(2) & 17(2A) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956. In disposing of that application, the learned Trial Judge has observed that there is no relationship of landlord and tenant and for that reason, the application is liable to be rejected. Accordingly, he has rejected the application under Section 17(2) & 17(2A) of the said Act. Bei...
Ashok Kumar Baid. Vs. United Spirit Ltd.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Dec-24-2010
1. Challenge is to the order dated June 3, 2010 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Second Court at Alipore in Money Suit No.62 of 2000 thereby rejecting an application of the defendant for production of two documents for examination of the plaintiffs witness on recall.2. The short fact is that the plaintiff / opposite party herein instituted a money suit being Money Suit No.62 of 2000 for recovery of money, damages, etc. The defendant/petitioner herein is contesting the said suit by filing a written statement denying the material allegations raised by the plaintiff. Both parties have adduced evidence and the evidence on behalf of the defendant has been closed even on recall and the suit has been fixed for argument. At that stage, the defendant/petitioner filed an application for recall of two documents dated April 16, 2010 and May 4, 2010 stating, inter alia, that those two documents are vital for proper adjudication of the dispute. His application was rejected by the...
Sk. Bellal and ors Vs. the State
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Dec-24-2010
1. Conspectus of the AppealSix appellants named above preferred the present appeal challenging the legality of the judgment and order of conviction and sentence rendered by the learned Sessions Judge, 2nd Court Hooghly on 13.01.1990 in Sessions Trial Case No. 51 of 1983 under Sections 148/307/149 and 302/149 IPC (in short Indian Penal Code). Their appeal was admitted on 13.02.1990. All of them were directed to be released on bail to the satisfaction of the learned CJM Hooghly vide this courts order dated 16.02.1990. When this appeal was made ready for hearing, they absconded. In such a situation their bail bond was cancelled by this court on 07.08.2008 Subsequently Appellant No. 1 (A1 in short) surrendered on 19.11.08 while Appellant Nos. 2 & 4 (A2 & A4 in short) surrendered on 16.12.08 and 19.11.08 respectively. All the appellants except Sk. Tazen, since deceased were granted bail for the second time by this court on 08.07.09 During pendency of this appeal, A1 and Appellant No...
Pancham at Kebal Rai Vs. State of W. B.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Dec-24-2010
1. In Sessions Case No. 97 of 2005 [Sessions Trial No. 1(12) of 2005] the appellant-accused was charged for having committed an offence punishable under Sections 302/394 of the IPC and by judgment and orders dated 15.09.2008, 18.09.2008, 20.09.2008 and 23.09.2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 4th Fast Track Court, Bichar Bhawan, Kolkata, the appellant-accused was found guilty of having committed an offence punishable under Sections 302 IPC and was sentenced to death by ordering to be hanged by neck till death. The appellant-accused has also been found guilty of having committed an offence punishable under Section 394 of the IPC and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life with a direction that the sentence of the offence punishable under Section 394 IPC would cease to have any effect in case the sentence of death under Section 302 IPC is confirmed by the High Court. This appeal is directed against the sentence of death and imprisonment for life. Along with the appea...
Glaxo Smithkline Consumer Health Care Ltd. Vs. Second Labour Court and ...
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Dec-24-2010
1. In this writ petition, the petitioner, a limited company has challenged an order passed by the learned Judge, Second Labour Court, Kolkata, allowing an application filed by the workman, being the respondent no. 5 for impleading the writ petitioner as a party to a subsisting proceeding pending before him. The respondent no. 5 was appointed by Jagatjit Industries Ltd. (JIL) being the respondent no. 4 as a sales promotion representative with effect from 22 March 1994. Subsequently, there was an arrangement between the writ petitioner and JIL for transfer of two brands of JIL to the writ petitioner, being Viva and Maltova. By an agreement executed on 8 February 2000, which was termed as Secondary selling and merchandizing agreement an arrangement between the petitioner and JIL was entered into, under which the latter agreed to render professional services in secondary selling of products under these two brands. The case of the writ petitioner is that under the said agreement, employees ...
Niva Halder and ors. Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Dec-24-2010
1. These two appeals were heard analogously, as in both these appeals, the selfsame order passed by the learned Single Judge is the subject-matter. These two Mandamus-Appeals are preferred by third parties to the writapplication with a prayer for leave to prefer such appeals and are directed against order dated February 22, 2010, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court by which His Lordship disposed of the writ-application by directing that within six weeks from the date of communication of the said order, the Refugee Relief & Rehabilitation Department, Government of West Bengal, should hand over vacant possession of the land in question to the Collector, Hooghly and the said Collector shall determine after hearing the authorized representative of the writpetitioner the rent-compensation payable for using the requisitioned land and pay the amount and deliver vacant possession of land to the writ-petitioners within a fortnight from the day, he received possession.2. Being dissati...
Goutam Lahiri. Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Dec-24-2010
1. The petitioners son is a student of WWA Cossipore English School (hereafter the school). The school is affiliated to the Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations (hereafter the Council). 2. This petition dated May 3, 2010 has been presented by the petitioner feeling aggrieved by the action of the school in not promoting his son to class X from class IX. According to the petitioner, his son had succeeded in obtaining marks more than that stipulated by the Council for regulating promotions of students from class IX to class X and, therefore, have acted without jurisdiction. 3. Mr. S.K. Mukherjee, learned advocate representing the petitioner has taken pains to demonstrate before the Court that the petitioners son was entitled to be promoted to 2 class X in terms of the regulations framed by the Council. He, accordingly, prayed for an order on the school to promote the son of the petitioner to class X and further order on the Council to allow him appear at the School Final...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »