Kolkata Court January 2011 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.
State of West Bengal Vs. Afcon Infrastructure Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-06-2011
1. This is an application filed under Section 34 of the 1996 Act, for setting aside the award and the corrected award dated 30th September, 2004 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal.2. Petitioners Case2.1 The case of the petitioner is that the agreement between the parties contemplated widening of Panagarh Mourigram Road. The said work was divided into four sections and the works in respect of the said agreement related to the Rampurhat and Mourigram section and was numbered as S-11. Such works was to be completed within 42 months but in fact, was completed in 83 months after grant of five extensions. No claims were made during the subsistence of the agreement instead claims have been made after the works have been completed. The claims made are contrary to Clause 53 of the Conditions of Contract, which lays down the procedure for making claims. Under Clause 53.1, notice of claim for additional payment ought to have been made within 28 days from the event which gives rise to such claim. Not...
Sukhendu Pradhan. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Jan-06-2011
1. The petitioner claims to be the husband of Smt. Chhandadipa Mondal, a Class-XII student of Pathar Pratima Ananda Lal 2 Adarsha Vidyalaya (hereafter the school). Smt. Chhandadipa Mondal (hereafter the student) admittedly is a minor. The petitioner has presented this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, inter alia, praying for a direction on the Headmaster and the Secretary of the Managing Committee of the school, respondents 4 and 5 respectively herein, as well as the Secretary of the West Bengal Council of Higher Secondary Education (hereafter the Council), respondent no.6 herein, to allow her take the Higher Secondary Examination, 2011 to be conducted by the Council in March/April, 2011 as a very special case. 2. The petitioner claims that after his marriage with the student was solemnised on May 2, 2010, she went to the school for continuing her study in Class-XII. However, the respondent no.4 prevented her on the ground that being married she would spoil the other unma...
M/S. Nvr Steels and anr. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Jan-06-2011
1. The petitioners in this art.226 petition dated September 20, 2010 are seeking the following reliefs: (a) A writ in the nature of Mandamus do issue directing and/or commanding the respondent Nos. to set aside, rescind and/or cancel the purported and wrongful notice under Reference No. MSTC/ERO/DVC/DTPS/04-05/09-10/T-100 issued by the Deputy Manager, MSTC Ltd. dated 27th August, 2010; (b) A writ in the nature of Mandamus do issue directing the respondents, their men, servants and agents, specially respondent nos. 2 to 7 to deliver unsupplied materials which have been fallen due from 3rd installment without any further delay. 2. By the letter dated August 27, 2010 (at p.108) MSTC Ltd. terminated the contract in exercise of power conferred by cl.8(d) of STC of the tender concerned, and questioning the action the petitioners have brought this petition. 3. Mr Bose, counsel for DVC, has submitted that the petitioners remedy, if any, was before the arbitrator in terms of the arbitration ag...
Nafisa Imran Shah Vs. the Board of Wakfs and ors.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Jan-06-2011
1. The petitioner in this art.226 petition is alleging that though she is entitled to certain benefits under the instrument creating a wakf called Prince Golam Mohd. Wakf Estate, the committee of management of the wakf has ignored her claim. 2. Counsel submits that as will appear from the document (at p.63) the Chief Executive Officer of the Board of Wakf, West Bengal referred the petitioners claim to the committee. 3. It is evident from the document, a letter dated December 24, 2009, that thereby the Chief Executive Officer of the Board did not direct the committee to do anything. To be precise, nothing in the letter can be treated as an order or decision of the Chief Executive Officer or the Board of Wakf under any provision of the Wakf Act, 1995. 4. Nothing created any statutory obligation of the Board of Wakf or the mutawalli of the wakf (or the committee of management of the wakf, for that matter) to decide whether the petitioner is entitled to any benefit under the instrument cre...
Jamat Ali Sheikh at Mondal. Vs. the State of West Bengal.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Jan-06-2011
1. This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 4th Court, Nadia in sessions Trial No. V of March, 2000 corresponding to sessions case No. 21 of May, 1996 convicting the appellant under Section 302 Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to suffer S.I. for three months. 2. The prosecution case, in short, is that Manjari Bibi was married with Jamat Ali in the month of Chaitra, 1398 B.S. The marriage was registered. After marriage Manjari was subjected to torture in her matrimonial home by her husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law. Thereafter Jamat Ali started living in the fathers house of Manjari from the month of Bhadra. On 15.10.1992 at about 12.30 A.M. Jamat Ali took Manjari to the field for attending natures call, but, they did not come back home on that night. On the next morning the informant and others searched for them. In the aft...
Subhash Chandra Hajra Vs. Union of India Service Through Ministry of D ...
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-06-2011
LT Gen K. P. D. Samanta, Member (Administrative) 1. Subhash Chandra Hajra, an ex Subedar from the Corps of Signals of the Indian Army, filed a writ petition ( WP 8694 (W)/1996) at Honble Calcutta High Court on 26 June 1996, which was later transferred to this Tribunal (TA 26/2010) on 17 May 2010. The Petitioner was enrolled in the Army on 06 January 1966 as a Sepoy (Clerk) in the Corps of Signals. After successful training he, in his Petition, has recounted record of his meritorious service including war service during 1971 War. After being promoted to the rank of Naik in 1976, he was posted to the Records office of the Corps of Signals at Jabalpur in July 1976. 2. The Petitioner, while with Signals Records in 1976, was denied timely opportunity to attend and clear a promotion cadre, mandatory for promotion to Havildar (N Cadre), that gave rise to his first grievance as submitted in Paragraph 6 of his main Petition. Herein it is stated that though theN Cadre was conducted in July-Aug...
Sk. Raju. Vs. Asit Kumar De and ors.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Jan-05-2011
1. This application is at the instance of the defendant no.1(kha) and is directed against the order no.221 dated December 19, 2006 and the order no.226 dated April 18, 2007 both passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), First Court, Midnapore(West) in other Suit No.1 of 1995.2. The short fact is that the plaintiffs/opposite parties herein instituted the Other Suit No.1 of 1995 in the Court of the learned Munsif, First Court, Midnapore against the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner praying for a decree of eviction, for recovery of possession and other reliefs. The predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner entered appearance in the suit and he was contesting the said suit by filing a written statement denying, inter alia, all the materials averments made in the plaint. On October 23, 1998, the original defendant executed a deed of agreement to the effect that after his demise, the petitioner, being his third son, would carry on his business in the name and style of Sita...
Smt. Nita Mukherjee and anr. Vs. Sandip Banerjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Jan-05-2011
1. This application is at the instance of the plaintiff and is directed against the order no.79 dated January 21, 2002 passed the learned Judge, Small Causes Court, Second Bench, Calcutta in Ejectment Suit No.956 of 2000 thereby disposing of an application under Section 17(2) and (2A) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956.2. The short fact is that the plaintiff/petitioner herein instituted a suit for eviction stating, inter alia, that the defendant/opposite party is a tenant in respect of three rooms with bath and privy situated on the first floor of the premises No.56F, Shyampukur Street under P.S. Shyampukur, Calcutta-700 004 at a consolidated monthly rent of Rs.120/- per month payable according to English calendar month. In that suit, the defendant appeared and filed an application under Section 17(2) and (2A) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 stating, inter alia, that he is a tenant in respect of the premises situated not only on the first floor of the said prem...
Tara Sankar Pal and anr. Vs. Dipali Patra and ors.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Jan-05-2011
1. Challenge is to the order no.100 dated September 22, 2004 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Fifth Court, Howrah in Title Suit No.115 of 1995 thereby rejecting an application of the plaintiffs under Order 16 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. The plaintiffs/petitioners herein instituted a Title Suit being T.S. No.115 of 1995 for declaration and permanent injunction against the opposite parties. The plaintiffs sought for declaration that the defendant no.1 is not the legally married wife and legal heir of late Lab Kumar Paul, full brother of the plaintiffs and that she has no right, title and interest in the suit plot, as described in the schedule of the plaint or any estate left by late Lab Kumar Paul. That suit is at the stage of peremptory hearing and the defendants/opposite parties herein are contesting the said suit. The plaintiffs filed an application under Order 16 Rule 10 of the C.P.C. praying for summoning one Niranjan Patra as witness and that summo...
Eih Limited. Vs. Jay Engineering Works Limited.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Jan-04-2011
1. This application is at the instance of the plaintiff and is directed against the order no.85 dated December 13, 2010 passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court, Calcutta in Title Suit No.61 of 2005 thereby allowing the application dated June 16. 2010 filed by the plaintiff and the application dated October 6, 2010 filed by the defendant.2. The plaintiff/petitioner instituted a Title Suit No.61 of 2005 praying for permanent injunction and other consequential reliefs. In that suit, the defendant appeared. It is carrying on a business in the shop room in suit as a tenant under the plaintiff. The defendant / opposite party wanted to repair/renovate the said shop room and for that reason, the plaintiff filed the suit for permanent injunction and other consequential reliefs. In that suit, the Honble High Court, Calcutta passed an order in F.M.A.T. No.505 of 2005 thereby directing that an inspection of the said shop room should be done by a commissioner. He should submit report thereaft...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »