Kolkata Court March 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.
Chand Mohan Sammader. Vs. the State of West Bengal.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Mar-28-2011
Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties. 1. This Criminal Appeal bearing CRA No. 551 of 2005 has been directed against the judgement and order of conviction dated June, 9 2005, and sentence dated June 10,2005 passed by Sri Sukhendu Das, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court IV, Krishnanagar, Nadia, in Sessions Trial NO. XVII (4) 2005 arising out of Sessions Case No. 48(2) 2005 convicting the appellant of offences punishable under Sections 376/417 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing the convict to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs. 5000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, and for six months and to pay fine of Rs. 600/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month for the offence under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code, while the said sentences as passed shall run concurrently and fine, if realised be paid to the victim S...
Krishna Bahadur Chhetry and ors. Vs. Siliguri Municipality and ors.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Mar-28-2011
1. This application is at the instance of the plaintiffs and is directed against the order no.97 dated July 31, 2003 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jalpaiguri in Misc. Case No.16 of 2001 arising out of the O.C. Suit No.97 of 1996. 2. The short fact is that plaintiffs instituted a suit being O.C. Suit No.97 of 1996 for declaration, cancellation of a sale deed, injunction and other reliefs. In that suit, notices were issued upon the opposite parties but they did not contest the said suit. As a result, the suit was decreed ex parte on December 5, 2000. Thereafter, on October 5, 2001, the defendant nos.1 to 3 filed an application for setting aside the ex parte decree along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1965 for condonation of delay and the said application for setting aside the ex parte decree was converted into a Misc. Case No.16 of 2001. That misc. case was dismissed for non-appearance of the defendants. Thereafter, the defendant nos.1 t...
Barendra Nath Maity and ors. Vs. Khagendra Nath Maity and anr
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Mar-28-2011
1. This application is at the instance of the defendants and is directed against the order dated September 16, 2010 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Third Court, Paschim Medinipur in Misc. Appeal No.18 of 2010 arising out of an order dated February 22, 2010 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), First Court, Paschim Medinipur in Judicial Case No.18 of 2009 arising our of Title Suit No.126 of 2009. 2. The plaintiffs/opposite parties herein instituted a suit being Title Suit No.126 of 2009 before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), First Court, Paschim Medinipur for a decree for partition in respect of their 22 decimals of land within the suit property against the defendants/opposite parties herein. The petitioners are contesting the said partition suit and they have filed a written statement denying all the material allegations made in the plaint. At the time of filing of the suit, the plaintiffs filed an application for temporary injunction. That ap...
Ashok Kumar Bansal. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-28-2011
1. This appeal is directed against an order dated July 10, 2007 in a writ petition being W.P.No. 934 of 2009 where the Writ Court was pleased to dismiss the petition on the ground that the petitioner should have approached appropriate civil court for adjudication of the disputed question of fact connected with the issue whether all the materials forming part of the sole lot were delivered to him by the respondent authorities. 2. The case of the appellant is that pursuant to a tender notice, the appellant/writ petitioner became successful bidder in respect of Lot No.HLL(R)-1. It is also to be noted that the sale is on as is where is basis which has been specifically mentioned in the said tender notice. It is a fact that on 30th July, 2004, an acceptance letter was issued by MSTC Ltd. on behalf of Hindustan Copper Ltd. and the appellant was directed to deposit the agreed amount of Rs.1.40 cores in respect of the said lot in following instalments 1st instalment Rs.46,66,667/- due on 20.8....
Sia Food Products Limited. Vs. Moti Biscuit Private Limited.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-28-2011
1. The application has been made in the execution proceedings by Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited. The applicant insinuates that the parties to the execution proceedings engaged in a friendly round of litigation that culminated in a tailormade award and, in the execution proceedings, an attempt has been made to thwart the applicant from taking steps under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 in respect of the immovable properties which are described in page 70 of the application. 2. The application details several dates which are relevant. The notice issued under Section 13(2) of the said Act of 2002 to the judgment-debtor herein was dated October 8, 2007. Though the applicant claims that the authorised officer of Allahabad Bank had taken possession of the secured assets in December, 2007, it would appear from the reports filed by the Receiver appointed in the execution proceedings that Al...
Bikas Roy Vs. Union of India Service Through the Secretary and Others
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-28-2011
LT Gen K. P. D. Samanta, Member (Administrative): 1. The petitioner, Bikas Roy, Havildar (CHM) is a serving non-commissioned officer in the Corps of Signals in the Indian Army. As a Havildar, while posted in 3 Karnataka Girls Battalion, NCC on an extra-regimental employment (ERE), he was considered for promotion to the rank of Naib Subedar by a Departmental Promotion Committee (in short the DPC) on 5-3-2010, as perused from the DPC proceedings that was placed before us by the respondents during hearing on 8-3-2011. Accordingly, the Signals Records (respondent no. 2) intimated the unit, where the petitioner was posted (33 Corps Operating Signals Regiment),vide their letter of 16th June, 2010 that the petitioner was to be promoted to the rank of Naib Subedar with effect from 1st August, 2010. 2. The promotion order as above was not implemented by 33 Corps Operating Signal Regiment on following grounds, as communicated to the petitioner vide their letter of 1st August 2010 (Annexure A-1 o...
Ambuj Biswas and ors. Vs. Sudhangshu Dubey.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Mar-27-2011
1. This Court has heard the learned Advocates for respective parties. The facts of the case, briefly, are as follows: 2. The plaintiff filed Title Suit No. 38 of 1998 against the defendant and the said suit was placed before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) 1st Court at Bankura. The plaintiffs, claiming to be the owners of the suit property by virtue of purchase by registered deeds dated 24.10.1979 and 13.6.1980, alleged that the defendant requested the plaintiffs for grant of a licence in respect of the suit property for a temporary period and the defendant was referred to the plaintiffs by one Manindra Das, a relative of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs alleged that the plaintiffs, subsequently, needed the suitproperty and served a notice to quit upon the defendant but the defendant did not vacate the suit property and, hence, the said suit was filed for evicting the defendant from the suit property. 3. The defendant contested the said suit by filing written statement and deny...
Joydev Bag and ors. Vs. Dr. Sudhir Kumar Ghosh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-25-2011
1. Instead of disposal of the application for stay, we propose to hear out the appeal itself by treating it as on days list. This appeal is at the instance of some of the defendants in a suit for declaration and injunction and is directed against an order dated 17th March, 2011, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court, by which His Lordship directed the Receiver to take immediate possession of all the medicines and goods at the medicine shop with a further direction to shut down the nursing home within a specified period after being satisfied that there is no operation scheduled immediately. 2. It appears that this order was passed on 17th March, 2011 when the appellants before us did not enter appearance. As this order is an interim order appointing Receiver over the business of the plaintiffs themselves and the defendants have not yet entered appearance and the main application for appointment of Receiver is yet to be heard on merit, we are not inclined to entertain this appea...
Bhabani Pakrey and ors. Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Mar-25-2011
1. This was an appeal against the interim judgment and order dated 10th January, 2011 passed by the learned trial Judge in the writ petition filed by the appellants above-named. The appellants and the respondents Nos. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 are the students of Shyamsundar College situates at Shymsundar in the District of Burdwan. The eligible students in this college went for election for the re-constitution of the students union of the said college for the year 2010 - 2011. The said election was held on 23rd of December 2010. The appellants were not successful candidates as such they could not participate in the re-constitution of the students union. The above respondents who were the students were successful and could participate in reconstituted formation of the Students Union. It appears from the writ petition that from the day of publication of the provisional voter list some of the appellants raised correctness of those voter lists alleging irregula...
Hdfc Bank Ltd. Vs. Surendra Kumar Jaiswal.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-25-2011
1. This application for contempt is for violation of an order dated 6th August, 2010 of this Court, the operative part whereof is set out hereinbelow for convenience : 2. This Court deems it fit to impose on the contemnor a find of Rs.2000/- to be deposited with the Registrar, Original Side, of this Court failing which there will be a sentence of imprisonment. The contemnor shall immediately make over possession of the vehicles in question to the learned Receiver and in any case within 7(seven) days from date. The petitioner shall personally accompany the learned Receiver to enable the learned Receiver to take possession of the vehicles in question. The contempt application is disposed of.3. On 3rd December, 2010, the contemnor appeared in person and submitted that the vehicle had been repaired and was lying at Sharma Garage, Bavandanga, Bally, Howrah. This Court, by its order dated 3rd December, 2010, directed the contemnor to hand over the vehicle to the Receiver within 10th December...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »