Kolkata Court June 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.
Mahatab Ali.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-28-2011
1. The challenge in this revisional application is to the judgment of acquittal dated 16.1.2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, Murshidabad in Sessions Sl. No.284 of 1992 (Sessions Trial No.4th August, 2001). The legality, validity and propriety of the judgment impugned has been challenged on the following grounds; a) that the learned Trial Court failed to appreciate the evidence of eye witnesses in its proper and true perspective; b) that the learned Trial Court erred in discarding evidence of witnesses thereby miscarriage of justice occasioned; c) that the learned Trial Court ought to have relied on the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 5, P.W.7 and P.W.8 as well as the evidence of the Doctor who conducted the post mortem on the dead body; d) that the judgment impugned being otherwise bad in law, is liable to be set aside. 2. The case before the learned Trial Court, in short, is that on 12.4.1989 at about 10.45 hours, one Mahatab Ali lodged an F.I.R. in Jalangi Police...
Ajit Saha at Ajit Kumar Saha Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-28-2011
1. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for quashing of the proceedings arising out of Bidhannagar Police Station (south)Case No. 80/2006 dated 30.8.06 under Section 471/468/420/120B/34 of Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bidhannagar being G.R. No. 419/2006. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the Senior Manager, Canara Bank, Salt Lake, Kolkata lodged a complaint with Officer-in-Charge, Bidhannagar Police Station (south), Salt Lake, Kolkata alleging that housing loan was sanctioned and disbursed to six purchasers of the residential flats in respect of one multistoried building situated at 169, Motilal Colony, near Airport Gate No. 2 Dum Dum, Kolkata. The flats were promoted by M/S. S.P. Construction, a partnership firm, at joint venture with the owner of the land Mrs. Reba Basu wife of Late Chitta Ranjan Basu. It has been alleged that the loan amounting to Rs. 39,94,923...
Syed Morshed Ali at Morshed Ali Vs. the State of West Bengal.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-28-2011
1. This is an application under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for quashing of the proceedings arising out of Amta Police Station Case No. 77/2001 dated 13.10.01 under Section 4D of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act corresponding to G.R. Case No. 657/01 now pending before the Learned Judicial Magistrate, Amta. 2. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the B.L. & L.R.O., Amta lodged complaint with the Officer-in-charge, Amta Police Station alleging that Syed Morshed Ali @ Morshed Ali, i.e. the petitioner herein was making attempt for alteration in the land and changing thereby the character and mode of use of the land appertaining to Plot No. 4454 (C.S.) corresponding to 4226 (RS), Mouza-Amta, J.L. No. - 121, P.S. - Amta unauthorisedly without any prior permission of the Collector and in violation of Section 4C of the W.B.L.R. Act. Upon such complaint, the case bearing Amta Police Station Case No. 77 /01 dated 13....
Saroj Kumar Khettry Vs. Dr. Arjun Kumar Mondal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-27-2011
ORDER:1. By this application, the petitioner seeks to quash the notice dated 3rd June, 2011. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he is a member of the Co-operative Society. An Award was passed on 29th January, 1983 whereby Flat 5E was allotted in favour of the petitioner. Diverse proceedings have been initiated from the said Award. Such proceedings have failed. Title Suit No.352 of 1997 was also filed before the 2nd Judge, Senior Division, Alipore and in such Suit an application was filed under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. 3. Such application was initially not allowed in the Trial Court but in revision the order of the Trial Court was set aside and Title Suit was dismissed. Thereafter, Dispute Case No.29 RCS of 2000 was filed by the Private Respondent. Orders have been passed and these orders have also been challenged in writ-petition. Thereafter an enquiry has been directed by order dated 1st October, 2010 which has been confirmed by order dated 18-11-2010. 4. On 30-5-2011 an Enquiry Office...
Sri Subhabrata Ghosh. Vs. Smt. Mohua Ghosh.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-27-2011
1. Challenge is to the order no.32 dated November 24, 2008 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 1 st Fast Track Court, Howrah in Misc. Case No.86 of 2005 thereby disposing of an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. 2. The husband / petitioner herein instituted a suit being Matrimonial Suit No.588 of 2005 against the wife / opposite party for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty. The wife / opposite party herein is contesting the said matrimonial suit and she filed an application praying for alimony. Upon consideration of evidence adduced by both the parties, the learned Trial Judge disposed of the application for alimony granting at the rate of Rs.5,000/- per month for the wife, Rs.3,000/- per month for her son and Rs.10,000/- as litigation cost. The alimony was to be paid from the date of filing of the application till disposal of the suit. Being aggrieved by such orders, the husband has preferred this application. 3. Now, the question is whe...
Murtuja HossaIn Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-27-2011
1. By this writ petitioner, the petitioner seeks a direction upon the Zilla Parishad to allow him to operate the subject Ferry Ghat. 2. The case of the petitioner is that an offer was made for the subject Ferry Ghat and sums deposited. Due to obstruction caused by certain persons, it was not possible for him to operate the Ferry Ghat. With regard to such obstruction an enquiry was also made and the respondent no. 5 found that by construction of temporary bamboo structures, the road to the Ferry Ghat had been obstructed. The authority requested the police personnel to be present at the said spot to enable a resolution of the said problem. In spite thereof, no step has been taken. 3. In fact, from a communication issued by the respondent no. 3 to his advocate, it appears that the respondent no. 2 has not taken any steps to construct the road or to remove the obstruction therefrom. Hence the instant application has been filed and orders sought. 4. Counsel for the respondent Zilla Parishad...
Pijush Kanti Bhadury and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-27-2011
ORDER:1. The subject matter of controversy pertains to inter se seniority between the petitioners and the private respondents. The petitioners approached the Tribunal with the grievance that they were recommended by Public Service Commission for appointment in January, 1996. 2. The medical fitness test was also conducted in January 1996 whereas the private respondents were subsequently recommended and their medical test was also conducted subsequent to that of the petitioners. Hence, the petitioners should be treated as senior to the private respondents group. The petitioners also prayed that the Gradation List should be quashed and proper Gradation List should be prepared. 3. Opposing the application, the State contended before the Tribunal that the Gradation List was a provisional one and the final list was yet to be published. With regard to the seniority, according to the State, the petitioners were appointed subsequently and thus became junior to the respondents group. The Tribuna...
Paresh Chandra Mandal Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-27-2011
1. The petitioner in this art.226 petition dated June 23, 2011 is questioning an order dated June 19, 2011 (at p.60) issued by the Registrar General of Marriages, West Bengal evidently under r.41 of the West Bengal Special Marriage Rules, 2010 and r.35 of the West Bengal Hindu Marriage Registration Rules, 2010. 2. By the order the Registrar General has directed the petitioner not to function as a non-official Marriage Officer and non-official Hindu Marriage Registrar for six months with immediate effect and to submit all pending notices and applications to the office of the Registrar General immediately. 3. Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits as follows. June 19, 2011 when the order was issued was a Sunday. The Registrar General harbouring a grudge against the petitioner who previously moved this Court and has also moved a case questioning the validity of the rules issued the order on a Sunday without stating the urgency. In any case, without first cautioning the petitioner in...
Tapan Kumar Maitra Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-24-2011
ORDER:1. The tribunal application was dismissed for default. 2. The causes shown are not all sufficient. Ms. Aparna Ghosh, learned Counsel appearing for the Railways, strenuously contends that the petitioner was not at all diligent, in fact he made contradictory statement in this petition. 3. Even before this Court he erroneously prayed for recalling of the order dated February 02, 2011, whereas the Tribunal passed the order on February 04, 2011. The conduct of the petitioner is deplorable. 4. However, for ends of Justice, we feel, one more opportunity should be given to the petitioner. The order dated February 04, 2011, refusing to restore the application, being O.A. 767 of 2004, is recalled. The order dated November 18, 2005, dismissing the application, being O.A. 767 of 2004, is also set aside. 5. O.A. 767 of 2004 is restored to its original file and number and the same be placed for hearing at an early date before the Tribunal. We make it clear that the Tribunal would not allow...
Rika Global Impex Ltd. Vs. the Owner and Parties
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-24-2011
1. In a suit for a money decree this application has been filed for interim relief. 2. The case of the petitioner is that in A.S.No.7 of 2011, an order of arrest, was passed on 16th June, 2011. Such order was continued and directed to be vacated only upon furnishing of a security by the owners of vessel “M.V.Sur”. The owners of the vessel were ready and willing to furnish security and, therefore, sought vacating of the order of arrest. 3. On 16th June, 2011, a notice was issued by the buyers of the said goods intimating its inability to continue with the agreement. In view thereof no copy of the bill of lading was taken by the petitioner herein. Subsequently by an advocate’s letter dated 23rd June, 2011, the petitioner sought to terminate the charter party agreement between the parties. In view of rejection of the agreement by the buyers no purpose, according to the petitioner, will be served in taking a copy of the bill of lading and the goods if allowed to leave t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »