Kolkata Court July 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.
Tulika Samanta, Nee PanjA. Vs. Utpal Kumar SamantA.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-18-2011
1. These two revisional applications have arisen out of the same Order No.67 dated July 2, 2010 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 4 th Court, Alipore in Misc. Case No.15 of 2010 thereby disposing of an application under Section 36 of the Special Marriage Act. The wife has filed the C.O. No.2554 of 2010 and the husband has filed the other C.O. No.3102 of 2010 against the same order. For convenience, I am discussing the C.O. No.2554 of 2010. 2. C.O. No.2554 of 2010.:- The husband / opposite party herein instituted a suit being Matrimonial Suit No.75 of 2005 for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce. The wife is contesting the said suit. She filed an application under Section 36 of the Special Marriage Act claiming alimony for herself and her son. That application was registered as Misc. Case No.15 of 2010 and by the impugned order, the application has been disposed of directing the husband to pay a monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per month for t...
Sri Susanta Ghosh Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-18-2011
1. The petitioner seeking anticipatory bail is a member of the legislative assembly elected from the east Garbeta assembly constituency. He has continuously been representing the people of the aforesaid constituency commencing from the year 1985. He was a minister for a very long time. He as a matter of fact was the Minister-in-Charge of Paschimanchal Unnayan Affairs during the period between 2006 and 2011. He is an FIR named accused in the case. 2. The accusation is that on 22 nd September 2002 in the morning around 9 A.M. the victim Ajay Acharya, accompanied by some members of the Trinamul Congress who had earlier been uprooted from their respective residence by the miscreants of CPI(M), called at his house in the village Rainak within the jurisdiction of Keshpur Police Station. His companions included Ram Sani, Tarun Ghosh, Dil Mohammad, Raju Singh, Sk. Allauddin, Sk. Taju and many others. At that time the FIR named 40 accused persons belonging to CPI(M) Party armed with rifles, gun...
Avijit Biswas.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-18-2011
1. Since Mr. Debabrata Acharyya, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party/aggrieved wife entered appearance and the learned Counsel of both the parties have made the submissions in respect of the matter, this Court proposes to take up the petition itself without fixing any further date. 2. This application has been filed by Avijit Biswas praying for quashing of a proceeding under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 initiated by his wife on the ground of cruelty. In the petition of complaint under Section 12 of the Act, specifically in paragraph 6, it has been averred that the signatures of the opposite party/wife were obtained forcibly and in paragraph 7, it has been averred that the said papers containing her signatures have been used in a proceeding under section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act for the purpose of getting a decree of divorce on mutual consent although the opposite party/aggrieved wife had no such intention. 3. Accordin...
Chairman, Icici Bank Ltd. and ors Vs. Mr. Swapan Kr. Mallick.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-18-2011
1. This revisional application has been filed praying for quashing of the proceeding of the case No.183 of 2009 pending in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Burdwan wherein the petitioners have been shown as accused for committing offences under Section 406/420/467/468/471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The dispute between the parties in the case has already been settled amicably outside the Court. Therefore, the petitioners being the accused therein, have come up with this application praying for quashing of the proceeding pending in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Burdwan, in view of the decisions passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab, reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582 and Nikhil Merchant v. C.B.I. & Ors., reported in (2009) 1 C. Cr. Lr (SC) 19. 3. In fact, an application to that effect was filed by the petitioners herein in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Burdwan but unfortunatel...
Eastern Coal Fields Ltd. Vs. Smt. Bela Rani Bhattacharya and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-18-2011
1. The respondents are the land-losers of the appellant, Eastern Coalfields Ltd. (ECL) who took the possession of the land for the purpose of colliery. While acquiring such land the ECL floated a scheme of giving employment to one person of the family against one acre of land. Subsequently the ECL found difficult to provide employment as aforesaid, they subsequently adopted a scheme of allotting Grade “D” steam coal of 1600 mt. against one acre of land. The respondents are the owners of 2.39 acres of land out of which the ECL acquired 1.79 acre leaving .60 decimal as unacquired. It is a case of the respondents that the ECL, though paid crop compensation for the period from 1975 to 1977 but has not paid the price of the land, so acquired, used and utilized, and also the steam coal of Grade “D” in terms of the said scheme. Several representations were made but the ECL did not respond. It is further contended that the ECL has issued a delivery order in the ratio of...
J. K. Industries Limited Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (Central) I, ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2011
1. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax (“Act”) is at the instance of an assessee and is directed against order dated April 15, 2004 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Kolkata, in Income-tax Appeal bearing ITA No.1593(Kol.)/2003 for the Assessment Year 1996-97 and thereby dismissing the appeal preferred by the assessee. 2. Being dissatisfied, the assessee has come up with the present appeal. 3. The facts leading to the filing of this appeal may be summed up thus: a) The appellant is a public limited liability company within the meaning of the Companies Act, 1956 and the present appeal arises out of the assessment of the appellant for the Assessment Year 1996-97 for which the relevant previous year was the financial year ended on March 31, 1996. b) During the previous year ending on March 31, 1996, the appellant’s Managing Director travelled overseas to Argentina, Brazil, Cuba, Columbia, Russia, Germany, U.K and other countr...
Ashirbad Food Products Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Santosh Kr. Kataruka and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2011
1. This appeal as well as another appeal in the Appellate Side being No. A.S.T. 177 of 2011 were heard analogously by consent of the parties as the nature of both the orders passed by the learned Trial Judge are similar and identical in language - only difference is the order passed in the Original Side which is a final one, whereas the same passed in Appellate Side is interim order. 2. Both the appeals are preferred by a third party against the judgment and order dated 22nd March, 2011 (in Original Side) by which the learned Trial Judge has set aside the reasoned order passed by the Joint Directors and fresh order was directed to be passed. 3. The short fact in the Original Side matter leading to preferring the instant appeal is as follows:- 4. The respondent No.1 being the writ-petitioner and the sole proprietor of the respondent No.2 namely M/s. Laxmi Narayan Food Products (Unit No.II) has established and installed a flour mill with all modern equipments including automatic pa...
Bengal Aerotropolis Projects Ltd. Vs. Raj Sekhar Agarwal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2011
1. An aggrieved party in a proceeding under Section 397, 398 of the Companies Act 1956, before the Company Law Board, is up in appeal before me. This party is a public Company by the name of Bengal Aerotropolis Projects Ltd. They are the twelfth respondent in the said proceeding. Hereafter, reference to a party will be according to its description in that proceeding. They made an application before the Board which was numbered as C.A. No. 274 of 2010. They had one basic objection. They said the Section 397, 398 proceedings were between the petitioners and the first respondent and the persons who were in-charge of the affairs of it, its subsidiaries and associates. They had nothing to do in this proceeding and had been unnecessarily impleaded. To use legal terminology, they were neither a necessary nor a proper party. Hence, they wanted themselves struck off from those proceedings. 2. By the impugned order made on 2nd May, 2011, the Board refused to strike off the twelfth respondent. Be...
Mechano Paper Machines Ltd. Vs. Nepc Papers and Boards Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2011
1. This appeal is at the instance of a judgment-debtor and is directed against order dated April 06, 2011 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court by which His Lordship appointed a Receiver in respect of a property described in paragraph 12 of the affidavit in support of the tabular statement of the application for execution which is undisputedly situated beyond the territorial limit of this Court. 2. The decree was one for payment of money and in execution of the decree, the decree-holder sought to attach and sell an immoveable property belonging to the appellant situated beyond the territorial limits of this Court. The only question raised by the appellant in this appeal is that in view of Section 39(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure, the learned executing Court acted without jurisdiction inasmuch as, this Court has no jurisdiction to attach or sell an immoveable property situated beyond its territorial limit as an Executing Court. 3. Mr. Mitra, the learned Senior Advocate appe...
Mechano Paper Machines Ltd. Vs. Nepc Papers and Boards Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2011
1. This appeal is at the instance of a judgment-debtor and is directed against order dated April 06, 2011 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court by which His Lordship appointed a Receiver in respect of a property described in paragraph 12 of the affidavit in support of the tabular statement of the application for execution which is undisputedly situated beyond the territorial limit of this Court. 2. The decree was one for payment of money and in execution of the decree, the decree-holder sought to attach and sell an immoveable property belonging to the appellant situated beyond the territorial limits of this Court. 3. The only question raised by the appellant in this appeal is that in view of Section 39(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure, the learned executing Court acted without jurisdiction inasmuch as, this Court has no jurisdiction to attach or sell an immoveable property situated beyond its territorial limit as an Executing Court. 4. Mr. Mitra, the learned Senior Advocate a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »