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.
Dibakar Singh and anr. Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Dec-16-2010
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Midnapore in Sessions Trial Case No. XXIV of December, 1992 arising out of G.R. Case No. 242 of 1990 convicting the appellants under Section 304 Part-II read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, sentencing the appellant No. 1 Gurucharan Singh to suffer RI for 10 years and appellant No. 2 Dibakar Singh to suffer RI for 4 years and also to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each in default to suffer R.I. for 3 months each under Section 323 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The prosecution case, in short, is that one Satyaban Singh lodged complaint with the O.C., Lalgarh P.S. alleging that on 27.5.1990 at about 2.30 P.M. the goat of his elder brother Jugal Singh suddenly started eating the boiled rice of Gurucharan Singh in his courtyard. The wife of Gurucharan Singh abused the informant and started quarrelling with him. The informant and his elder ...
Panchanan Dalui Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Dec-15-2010
1. Thirty-nine accused were initially charged under Sections 148, 149, 302 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code. After completion of examination of the prosecution witnesses the learned Judge acquitted twenty accused under Section 232 of the Criminal Procedure Code observing that there was no evidence as against them. Three accused died in course of trial. Remaining sixteen accused were proceeded and they were ultimately convicted by the learned Judge. Hence, this appeal by sixteen accused being the appellants above named.2. Perusal of the written complaint depicts that Abhoy Chandra Das, a school teacher made a written complaint to the Police on November 16, 1978 at about 9.30 a.m. to the effect that a group of persons belonging to CPIM Party were cutting away Paddy from the Barga land belonging to Abhoy. Abhoy along with PW-2, 4, 8 and 16 as well as Jogendra Kumar Das and Jadunath Das, brothers of Abhoy tried to resist them. The accused under the leadership of Subol Chandra Mondal the ap...
Sri Ayodhya Das Vs. Smt. Manju Rani Saha
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Dec-15-2010
1. This Second Appeal is directed against judgment and decree dated 25.06.2001 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sealdah in Title Appeal No.97 of 1997 affirming the judgment and decree dated 30.09.1997 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 2nd Court, Sealdah in Title Suit No.643 of 1993.2. The respondent/plaintiff filed said suit for ejectment against appellant/plaintiff/tenant on the ground of default in payment of rent, reasonable requirement of the suit premises, committing nuisance and annoyance and causing damage by defendant/tenant. It is specific case of the plaintiff /landlord that her family consisted of herself, her husband and four sons. Out of which three are unemployed and that suit premises was required for starting a business by plaintiffs unemployed son. The plaintiff is in possession of three rooms in the suit house though plaintiff reasonably requires two more bedrooms, one kitchen and one thakur ghar and one room for starting business by her...
Narendra Kumar Tripathi. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-15-2010
1. This appeal raises an interesting question relating to the initiation of the disciplinary proceeding against the appellant/writ petitioner. It is contended on behalf of the appellant that the disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the said appellant/writ petitioner on the basis of a charge sheet, which according to the said appellant/writ petitioner, does not disclose any misconduct.2. The appellant herein, at the relevant time, was posted as Deputy Chief Mining Engineer, Hasdeo, South Eastern CoalFields Ltd., a subsidiary of Coal India Ltd. On 7th February, 1997 a show cause notice was served to the appellant under the signature of the Executive Director (Vigilance). However, subsequently by the written communication dated 19th February, 1997, the said appellant was asked to ignore the said show cause notice. The aforesaid letter dated 19th February, 1997 issued to the appellant herein is set out hereunder: MAHANADI COALFIELDS LIMITEDVIGILANCE DEPARTMENTANAND VIHAR BURLA SAM...
M/S. Indo American Electricals Ltd. Vs. Gopa Sinha and ors.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Dec-14-2010
1. This application is at the instance of the defendant and is directed against the order dated June 30, 2010 passed by the learned Judge, Presidency Small Causes Court, Calcutta in Ejectment Suit No.5 of 2007 thereby rejecting an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, an application under Section 7(1) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act and allowing the application under Section 7(3) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 on contest.2. The short fact is that the plaintiff/opposite party instituted an ejectment suit being Ejectment Suit No.5 of 2007 on the ground of default, reasonable requirement, etc. The petitioner was contesting the said suit by filing a written statement. Even it participated in the matter of amendment of the plaint by filing a written objection to the application for amendment of the plaint. But the petitioner did not take any step under Section 7(1) of the Act of 1997. For that reason, the opposite party filed an application under Section ...
East Bengal Club Vs. Paltu Mukherjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-14-2010
1. This appeal is at the instance of the defendant No.1 in a suit for injunction and other reliefs and is directed against the order dated December 1, 2010, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court by which His Lordship disposed of four different applications filed in the proceedings by setting aside the scheduled election of the appellant/club of the year 2010-11, which was fixed on December 5, 2010, with further direction that the process of election should be conducted under the supervision of a special officer (Gen. Shankar Roychowdhury, (Retired)). His Lordship further directed that the election should be conducted on the basis of photo electoral roll and voters list of the club prepared on September 20, 2010 and that no fresh nomination would be sought and the candidates already in the fray would contest for the respective posts. The special officer was given liberty to fix the date, time and venue of election. His Lordship made it clear that if the special officer thought ...
Uttam Mondal Vs. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Dec-14-2010
1. This application is at the instance of the plaintiff and is directed against the order no.21 dated August 28, 2006 passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court, Third Bench, Calcutta in Title Suit No.163 of 2006.2. The plaintiff instituted the suit for declaration, permanent and mandatory injunction stating, inter alia, that he is a registered owner of a motor vehicle under the registration no.WB 19-6763. The plaintiff purchased the said vehicle upon taking a loan from the defendant/opposite party upon execution of different papers. The said loan was duly repaid by the plaintiff.3. Thereafter, the plaintiff took another loan of Rs.2,25,000/- to be paid by 23 monthly instalments commencing from July, 2004. The plaintiff repaid loan up to 17th instalment but he could not repay the balance instalemnts starting from 18 to 23rd instalments. Thus, the total dues to be recovered from the plaintiff were to the extent of Rs.68,000/-. But all of a sudden, on February 4, 2006 the defendant / ...
Prafulla Sardar. Vs. Mamata SahA.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Dec-14-2010
1. This application is at the instant of the defendant and is directed against the order no.48 dated June 29, 2006 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Fourth Court, Alipore in Title Suit No.21 of 1998 directing the petitioner to deposit arrears of rent by 4 equal monthly instalments at the rate of Rs.950 per month.2. The short fact is that opposite party instituted a suit being Title Suit No.21 of 1998 for eviction and recovery of possession on the ground of default, reasonable requirement, causing damages, etc. In that suit, the defendant/petitioner filed an application under Section 17(2) and 17(2A) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956. That petition was disposed of by the learned Trial Judge holding that whether the opposite party is a thika tenant or not shall be decided at the time of trial and for disposal of the application under Section 17(2) and 17(2A) of the Act of 1956, it was held that the petitioner was a defaulter in payment of rent from July, 19...
Tiloka Adak Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Dec-14-2010
1. The petitioner in this art.226 petition dated December 8, 2010 is questioning the validity of a quotation dated February 25, 2010 issued by WBSEDCL, a licensee under the Electricity Act, 2003. 2. The petitioner applied to the licensee for supply of electricity for operating her submersible pump for which she obtained a permit from the District Level Authority, Hooghly under the provisions of the West Bengal Ground Water Resources (Management, Control and Regulation) Act, 2005. In response, the licensee issued the quotation specifically stating that it would remain valid for sixty days from February 25, 2010. 3. Within the period of validity of the quotation the petitioner did not respond in any manner. She allowed the quotation to die a natural death. Long after expiration of the period of validity, she submitted a representation dated September 13, 2010 requesting the station manager concerned of the licensee to consider the question of giving her supply from a domestic line passin...
Ashim Kumar Sarkar. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Dec-14-2010
1. The petitioner herein was a Lower Division Clerk in the Rifle Factory at Ichapur and was posted in the Purchase Department at the relevant time. 2. The respondent authorities herein issued a tender being T.E. No. D-9900002117 which was due to be opened on 27 th March, 2000. The interested parties submitted the tender documents in a sealed cover and dropped the same in a tender box which was opened on 27 th March, 2000 in presence of the Works Manager along with other two departmental officers. After opening tender box it was found that only four quotations were received in respect of the aforesaid tender being T.E. No. D-9900002117. The authorities concerned thereafter, decided to defer the opening date of the tender in question till 3 rd April, 2000 and the petitioner was, therefore, asked to put the sealed envelops containing the tender papers of the respective parties in the tender box. 3. From the records of this case we find that on the basis of one unanimous letter and a telep...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »