Kolkata Court May 2012 Judgments
Ananda Mondal Vs. State of West Bengal and Another
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-2012
Prasenjit Mandal, J. This application is at the instance of an accused person and is directed against the Order dated April 21, 2011 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kalyani, Nadia in G.R. Case No.1498 of 2010 thereby directing return of the seized vehicle to Tapas Majumder and consequently refusing the prayer of the petitioner for return of the vehicle in his favour. The petitioner is an accused person in the case under reference under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation that he had taken the vehicle in question while it was plying with loaded tea to reach its destination. The case is pending and the investigation is being done. The said vehicle in question was seized and it was directed that the vehicle should be returned to Tapas Majumdar and not to the petitioner. Being aggrieved by such order, this application has been preferred. Upon hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and on going through the materials-on-record, I find that ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Manasi Ghosh and Others Vs. Sushil Kumar Konar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-2012
Prasenjit Mandal, J. This application is at the instance of the defendants and is directed against the Order No.9 dated September 29, 2007 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 1st Court, Hooghly in Title Suit No.117 of 2007 thereby rejecting the application for stay and the Order No.13 dated December 7, 2007. The plaintiff/opposite party herein instituted a suit being Title Suit No.117 of 2007 for declaration that the plaintiff is a tenant of the suit premises under the defendants, permanent injunction and other reliefs. The defendants are contesting the said suit by denying the material allegations raised in the application. By the impugned order, the learned Trial Judge has rejected the application for stay. The learned Trial Judge has also directed the defendant No.3, by the order dated December 7, 2007, to open the main gate of the suit premises within 7 days after passing of the order. Being aggrieved, this application has been preferred. Now, the question is wheth...
Tag this Judgment!indrajit Saha Vs. the State of West Bengal and Another
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-2012
Prasenjit Mandal, J. This application is for quashing the proceeding of Complaint Case No.833 of 2011 under Sections 342/344 of the Indian Penal Code pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Barasat. The short fact is that the elder brother of the petitioner was married to the opposite party No.2 on January 29, 2001 according to Hindu Customs and Rites and one daughter, namely, Tanish Saha was born in the wedlock. There is no good relationship between the husband and wife and as such, dispute arose between the two. The guardians of the parties tried to solve the dispute in vain. As per contention of the husband, the wife mixed with one Sambhunath Saha and the criminal case was lodged against both of them and they, i.e., the wife and the said Sambhunath Saha pleaded guilty to the allegation under Section 290 of the Indian Penal Code. Thereafter, the wife filed a criminal case under Section 498A/406/323/324/34 of the Indian Penal Code against the husband and his o...
Tag this Judgment!Golam Karim Vs. Sarifan Bibi and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-2012
Prasenjit Mandal, J. This second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated December 15, 2005 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 6th Court, Alipore in Title Appeal No.171 of 2003 thereby affirming the judgment and decree dated July 31, 2003 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 3rd Additional Court, Alipore in Title Suit No.2 of 1997. The original plaintiff instituted a suit being Title Suit No.2 of 1997 for ejectment contending, inter alia, that the original plaintiff, Sk. Soleman was the owner of the premises in suit as described in the schedule of the plaint and the defendant was a monthly tenant under him in respect of that suit premises at a rental of Rs.16/- per month payable according to English Calendar Month. The plaintiff sought for recovery of possession on the ground of default in payment of rent, guilty of causing nuisance and annoyance to the suit premises and causing damage to the suit premises. The plaintiff also required the s...
Tag this Judgment!In the Matter of : an Application for Bail Under Section 439 of the Co ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-2012
This application for bail under Section 439 of the Cr. P. C. has been taken out by Subhrangshu Ghosh, who has been arrested in connection with Shakespeare Sarani P.S. case No.169 of 2011 dated 22.6.2011 under Section 420/408/406/418/120B of the I.P.C. Mr. Mukherjee, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that a bare reading of the F.I.R. discloses that all the allegations and aspersions are directed only against the accused no.1 who has been granted bail on the ground of skin cancer. He submits further that this accused has no direct connection with the alleged offence. He also submits that a proceeding under Section 138 of the N. I. Act has also been initiated against the petitioner by the defacto complainant on the self-same cheque. Considering the facts above and from the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 17.4.2012, he should be granted bail. Mr. Ghosh, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State of West Bengal/opposite party vehemently opposes...
Tag this Judgment!Devasmita Chakraborty and Others Vs. the State of West Bengal and Othe ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-2012
Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay, J. The appellants/petitioners herein are 77 students who were admitted in M.B.B.S. Course in the ICARE Institute of Medical Science and Research and Dr. Bidhan Chandra Roy Hospital, Haldia in terms of the orders passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in W.P. (Civil) No. 385 of 2011 on 16th September, 2011 and 28th September, 2011 respectively. The academic career of the aforesaid students are really at stake at the present moment. From the records available before this court we find that the Principal of the aforesaid Medical College published admission notice in various daily newspapers inviting applications for admission to first year M.B.B.S. Course of 2011-12. In the said admission notice, it was specifically mentioned that the College has been permitted by the Medical Council of India vide its Letter No. MCI-34 (41)/2011-Med/20986 dt. 30-06-2011 for the academic year 2011-2012 to admit 100 students and is already affiliated to the “Wes...
Tag this Judgment!Srei Equipment Finance Pvt. Ltd. (Sefpl) Vs. S L Earthmovers and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-2012
AP No.189 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE PVT.LTD.(SEFPL) Versus S L EARTHMOVERS & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :16. h May, 2012. Appearance: Mr.Satarup Banerjee, Adv.Mr.Sanjay Gupta, Adv.The Court : The respondents are represented. The matter had earlier been adjourned to afford the respondents an opportunity to make good the default. The petitioner claims that the principal amount in default is in excess of Rs.3.30 lakh. There will be an order of injunction restraining the respondents whether by themselves or by their servants or agents or otherwise howsoever from dealing with or disposing of or alienating or encumbering or parting with possession of the excavator that forms the subject-matter of the agreement between the parties, or any part thereof, in favour of any person without the previous leave of Court. Such order, however, will not stand in the way of the respondents usin...
Tag this Judgment!Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CA No.302 of 2012 CP No.19 of 2011 IN THE MATTER OF: RUBISTAR SUSRUSA HOSPITAL & MEDICAL INS. PVT.LTD.AND CA No.329 OF 201.CP No.19 of 2011 IN THE MATTER OF: RUBISTAR SUSRUSA HOSPITAL & MEDICAL INS. PVT.LTD.AND KANU KIRTANIYA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :16. h May, 2012. Appearance: Mr.J.L. Pugalia Mr.D.K. Chatterjee, Adv.Mr.R.Bagchi, Adv.Mr.Sudip Pal Chowdhury, Adv.Ms.Lopita Basu, Adv.The Court : CA No.329 of 2012 is the application by the contributory claiming to have been the holder of 96 per cent shares of and in the company whether directly or through the supporteRs.The original share certificates have been carried to Court. Upon such application for recalling the order of winding up passed on February 6, 2012 being received, the applicant was directed to advertise the gist of the application in the same newspapers where the creditors petition had been advertised. The necessary affidavit of compliance has bee...
Tag this Judgment!Sm. Ira Mukherjee and anr. Vs. Hirendra Nath Bhattacharjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-2012
ORDER SHEET G.A.No.597 of 2012 EOS No.36 of 1987 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SM. IRA MUKHERJEE & ANR. Versus HIRENDRA NATH BHATTACHARJEE & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date :16. h May, 2012. Appearance: Mr.R.L. Mitra, Advocate appeaRs.: The Court : - The corrections suggested in the order dated 12th April, 2012 are conveniently shown in the Schedule below: Let the order dated 12th April, 2012 be corrected in accordance with the corrections in the said order indicated in the Schedule below: Schedule The Court: The suit was decreed on 3rd September, 1998. The decree was carried in appeal. The appeal Court remanded the matter back to the trial Court for de novo trial of the suit. At the time of hearing of the suit before the Court below prior to passing of the decree dated 3rd September, 1998, the (plaintiffs had) defendant no.11 having a counter claim had tendered some documents in evidence. Those documents are in the cus...
Tag this Judgment!Vs. the Kolkata Municipal Corporation and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-16-2012
ORDER SHEET WP No.490 of 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE AJIT KUMAR MITRA & ORS.Versus THE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.Petitioners Respondents BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI Date :16. h May, 2012. For Petitioners : Mr.Rupak Ghose, Advocate. Mr.Sayantan Bose, Advocate. For K.M.C.The Court petitioneRs.: Mr.Sandip Kumar Dey, Advocate. Mr.Debangshu Mondal, Advocate. Ms.Piyali Sengupta, Advocate. : inter The writ alia, petition challenging has been filed the increase by in the annual valuation of the premises in question from Rs.17,600/- to Rs.31,350/-. At the outset, the learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioners admits that available under the Act. remedy has been made there is a statutory appellate remedy He further indicates that such appellate illusory inasmuch as the impugned order passed by the Hearing Officer has not been supplied to him till date. It is his case that only the rate card indicating enhance...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »