Kolkata Court April 2010 Judgments

Kolkata Municipal Corporation and ors. Vs. Arun Kumar Chatterjee and a ...

Court: Kolkata

Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. This mandamus appeal is at the instance of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation and is directed against order dated 30th June, 2009 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court by which His Lordship allowed a writ application filed by the respondent before us thereby challenging the assessment of annual valuation of Premises No.76 Sarat Bose Road, Calcutta at Rs.1,11,880/- with effect from 3rd Quarter of 1988-99 and at Rs. 4,07,500/- with effect from 3rd Quarter of 1994-95.2. By the order impugned in this appeal, the learned Single Judge directed the respondent No.5 of the writ application to consider the matter afresh and pass a reasoned order after giving opportunity of hearing to the writ-petitioner.3. Being dissatisfied, the Calcutta Municipal Corporation has come up with the present appeal.4. In the writ application the grievance of the writ petitioner was that in assessing the valuation for the periods in question, the special officer did not take into ...

Akshat Commercial Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Kalpana Chakraborty and ors.

Court: Kolkata

1. This appeal is at the instance of the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 in a writ-application and is directed against an order dated 5th and 6th May, 2008 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court by which His Lordship set aside the order dated January 11, 2008 passed by the Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal No.1, Kolkata, in O.A./SARFAESI 70/07 rejecting an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act filed by the writ petitioner for condonation of delay in filing the application under Section 17(1) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. ('SARFAESI Act').2. The writ-petitioner, in the writ-application, out of which the present mandamus-appeal arises, challenged the aforesaid order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal.3. The facts given rise to filing of the said writ-application may be summed up thus:The property involved in the writ-application was sold by the Allahabad Bank by taking recourse to Secti...

National Bank Ltd. Vs. Dulal Kanti Chowdhury and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Mohit S. Shah, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 1st March, 2010 of the Learned Single Judge allowing the application for modification of the orders dated 8th April and 4th September, 2008 in Civil Suit No. 217 of 2006.2. The suit was filed by respondent No. 1 herein 'plaintiff' against the present appellant, 'appellant' or 'defendant No. 2' and three other defendants claiming money decree and other consequential reliefs. Defendant No. 2 in the suit (appellant herein) filed its written statement and, on the ground that the plaintiff was not taking any steps in expediting hearing of the suit, defendant No. 2 made application being G.A. No. 990 of 2008 seeking directions upon the plaintiff to file affidavit of documents and in default the suit be dismissed. The Learned Single Judge passed order dated 8th April, 2008 disposing of the application in the following terms:This is an application for peremptory order of discovery. The plaintiff has been served but is not...

Smt. Sandhya Banerjee Vs. Smt. Shyama Banerjee and anr.

Court: Kolkata

Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. This appeal is at the instance of a respondent in a proceeding for grant of succession certificate under the provision of Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act and is directed against an order dated 24th August, 2007 passed by the learned Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Calcutta, in Act, XXXIX Case No. 17 of 2004 thereby allowing the said application in part by permitting Smt. Shyama Banerjee, the applicant, to get succession certificate to the extent of 3/4th share in respect of service benefit of her deceased husband, Ajit Banerjee, with further observation that Ashis Banerjee being an illegitimate son of Ajit Banerjee should get succession certificate to the extent of remaining 1/4th share of the service benefit of his deceased father, viz. Ajit Banerjee.2. Being dissatisfied, Smt. Sandhya Banerjee, the defendant of the said proceeding and the mother of Ashis, has come up with the present appeal.3. The facts giving rise to filing of the proceeding unde...

Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. Sri Prahlad Kumar Roy and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. This Mandamus-Appeal is at the instance of the Union of India and the Under Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Freedom Fighters' Division, and is directed against an order dated August 21, 2009 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court by which His Lordship disposed of the writ-application filed by the respondents by setting aside the order dated 27th May, 1996 passed by the appellant No. 2 and directing him to grant freedom-fighter's pension to the writ-petitioner under the provisions of Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the SSS Scheme) with effect from the date of his application for obtaining pension i.e. 10th July, 19812. The learned Single Judge further directed that the arrears from the date of application should be paid within four weeks from the date of communication of the said order with interest @10% per annum till the arrears are actually paid. The learned Single Judge further aw...

Krishnendu Samaddar and ors. Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Tapen Sen, J.1. This Writ Petition has been filed by the Parents/Guardians of their Wards, praying, that the School Authorities be Directed to admit them in Class V without insisting for any Admission Test as they have successfully completed the Primary Section of the said School. 2. The facts of the case are that the Petitioners represent their Wards who were duly admitted in the Primary Section of the Umarani Gorai Mahila Kalyan Girls' High School, Asansol. According to the Petitioners, the School has three Sections being the Primary, Secondary and the Higher Secondary Sections. According to the Petitioners, they were shocked to see a Notice on the Notice Board on 8.12.2009 informing, that for the Session 2010-11, the School will take Admission Test for enabling their Wards to be admitted in Class V and therefore, necessary Forms would be supplied on and from 18.1.2010 to 6.2.2010 and the date of the Admission was notified to be fixed on 11.2.2010 at 11 A.M.3. The Petitioners have st...

Arun Agarwal Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Tapen Sen, J.1. In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner prays for an Order commanding upon the Respondents to withdraw the Memo dated 14.12.2009 (as contained in Annexure P14) issued by the Principal Secretary, Department of Food & Supplies-cum-Commissioner, Food, whereby and whereunder, the said authority, acting in the capacity of the Appellate Authority upheld the decision of the Director of Rationing cancelling the Licence of the Petitioner on 17.6.2009. The Petitioner has made a further prayer for a Declaration declaring that the enquiry, search and seizure conducted in his fair price Shop on 8.11.2008 by two Joint Directors of Rationing (F&S;) is a nullity and therefore, the Order of cancellation of the Licence of the Petitioner passed on 17.6.2009 should be set aside. The Petitioner has made a further prayer for an Order restraining the Respondents from declaring any vacancy of a fair price shop arising out of such illegal cancellation of the Licence of the Petitioner.2. The short...

Rakesh Maruti Ltd. Vs. Kabra Commercial Ltd. and anr.

Court: Kolkata

ORDER1. This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 1st March 2010 passed by the first court on an application taken out by the defendant/appellant for variation and modification of the principal order dated February 9, 2010 which was subsequently modified by an another order dated February 16, 2010.2. Admittedly the suit in question is a suit simplicitor for claim of money. The case made out by the plaintiff/respondent is that the defendant/appellant through its authorised person approached the respondents for entering into financial agreement to provide finance either by direct investment or by financial sale agreements. By an agreement between the appellant and the respondent the respondents have financed the appellant's business either by direct investment or by entering into a high seas sales contract for supply of hard coking coal in bulk. It is further sated that by such arrangement it was agreed that the respondents shall be allotted 35% of the equity shares of the a...

Saregama India Limited Vs. Puneet Prakash Mehra and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: LC2010(2)222

Patherya, J.1. By an order dated 16.4.2010 an order was passed in terms of prayers [f], [g], [h] and [i] till 20.4.2010. The petitioner seeks extension of such interim order while the respondents seek vacating thereof.2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that Clause 3A of the agreement of 1981 assigned to it -[i] the copyright for making records of all contract works and [ii] the copyright, performing right and all other rights, title and interest in the literary, dramatic and musical works. Therefore, it was entitled to execute the agreement dated 11.2.2010. Clause 4[a] and [c] recognises the other rights assigned by the producer in favour of the company. In fact all rights and obligations to the agreement were to apply to the works included or to be included in the producer's film commenced or under production. Royalty both physical and non-physical has been paid to the Mehras. From a reading of the statement of royalty it will appear that synchronization fees or fees on account of ...

Smt. Utpala Deb and ors. Vs. Smt. Sita Devi Lohia and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Syamal Kanti Chakrabarti, J.1. This is an application for setting aside ex parte judgment passed on 16th March, 2009 in C.S. No.145 of 1991 partly on contest and partly ex parte after condonation of delay.2. The petitioners/ defendants Nos. 1(a) and 1(c) have claimed that the defendant No. 1(b) Narayan Prosad Lohia was all along looking after the aforesaid proceedings and was dealing with the disputed property including matters relating to payment of rent and municipal taxes. He was entrusted with the sole responsibility of determining the entire suit proceedings including all interlocutory applications. He was discharging his responsibility on behalf of defendant No. 1(a) and 1(c). The said defendants never involved themselves personally in the pursuit of the said proceedings since said Narayan Prosad Lohia was son of defendant No. 1(a) and brother of defendant No. 1(c). Accordingly they used to hand over all documents and letters received from their advocates or from this Hon'ble Cou...