Kolkata Court March 2016 Judgments
Purti West Enclave Private Limited and Anr. Vs. Kolkata Municipal Corp ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-31-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side W.P.No.146 OF2010Purti West Enclave Private Limited & Anr. versus Kolkata Municipal Corporation & ORS.For the petitioners:- Mr.Mainak Bose Mr.Prantik Gorai, Advocates For the KMC :- Mr.Aloke Kr. Ghosh Mr.Biswajit Mukherjee Mr.Gopal Chandra Das, Advocates Judgement On: - 31st March, 2016 I.P.MUKERJI, J. On 6th October, 1997, the Government of West Bengal constituted an Expert Committee to identify heritage buildings in the Kolkata Municipal Corporation area. With effect, from 22nd December, 1997, the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act was amended by adding various sub-Sections to Section 425. Now, certain provisions, newly introduced by amendment are of great significance. The Heritage Committee was to have a specific constitution. This committee would make a recommendation, identifying heritage buildings to the Mayor-in-Council, under Section 425B. The Mayor-inCouncil was required to examine the recommendation....
Tag this Judgment!Goutam Bhattacharjee Vs. Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-31-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side W.P.No.420 OF2014Goutam Bhattacharjee versus Kolkata Municipal Corporation & ORS.For the petitioners:- Mr.Sagar Bandopadhyay Mr.N.M.Mookerji Ms.Agnita BanerjeeAdvocates For the KMC: - Mr.N.C.Behani Ms.Papiya Banerjee Behani Mr.G.C.Das, Ms.Anuradha Sengupta..Advocates Judgement On: - 31st March, 2016 I.P.MUKERJI, J A point of some substance has been raised in this writ. The question is: if a departmental proceeding and a criminal proceeding on the self-same charges have been started against an employee and he is acquitted of the charge in the criminal proceeding, should he be also, as a matter of couRs.be exonerated in the departmental proceeding and/or should the departmental proceeding be dropped?. The writ petitioner was in 1995 working as a Block Sarkar with Kolkata Municipal Corporation. He is still working with the organisation. In that year, an allegation was made against him by the Corporation that the ...
Tag this Judgment!Nagreeka Exports Ltd. Vs. The Board of Truetees for the Port of Cal. a ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-31-2016
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE GA898of 2016 With WP364of 2006 NAGREEKA EXPORTS LTD.Versus THE BOARD OF TRUETEES FOR THE PORT OF CAL. & ORS.GA2211of 2006 GA1359of 2006 With WP364of 2006 NAGREEKA EXPORTS LTD.Versus THE BOARD OF TRUETEES FOR THE PORT OF CAL. & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 31st March, 2016. Mr.Bhaskar Sen, Sr.Adv.Mr.Debajyati Dutta, Adv.Mr.Sachida Nand Pandey, Adv..for the petitioner. Mr.Somnath Bose, Adv..for the respondent no.1. The Court: GA No.498 of 2006 is an application for restoration of a writ petition and an application being GA No.2211 of 2006. The restoration application has been filed with a delay of 716 days. The explanations given in the restoration application cannot be accepted as sufficient. However, for the ends of justice the restoration application is allowed. The writ petition being WP No.364 of 2006 along with all interim applications are taken up for hearing. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Kanchan Devi Jain Vs. Calcutta Municipal Corporation
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-30-2016
WP2362of 1998 With WP1411of 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SMT. KANCHAN DEVI JAIN Versus CALCUTTA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 30th March, 2016. Mr.Alok Kr. Ghosh, Adv.Mr.Nilanjan Chatterjee, Adv.Jugal Chandra Porel, Adv.Mr.Gopal Chandra Das, Adv.Mr.Debangshu Mondal, Adv.Mr.Mukti Ghosh, Adv Ms.Sonal Shah, Adv.Ms.V.Kendalia, Adv.Mr.Arnab Basu Mullick, Adv.The Court:- Two writ petitions being WP No.2362 of 1998 and WP No.1411 of 2004 are taken up for hearing analogously as they involve similar issues and relate to the same immovable property. In WP No.2362 of 1998 an order passed by the Municipal Commissioner dated October 27, 1997 is under challenge. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the impugned order is bad inasmuch as it has not taken into consideration the recommendation of the West Bengal Fire Services Authority in its entirety. The situation obtaining in the premises has no...
Tag this Judgment!Communist Party of India (Marxist) Vs. United Bank of India and Ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-30-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE PRESENT : DIPANKAR DATTA, J.W.P. No.983 of 2015 Communist Party of India (Marxist) Vs. United Bank of India & ors. For the petitioner : Mr. Samrat Sen, Sr. Advocate, Ms. Saswati Chatterjee, Advocate, Mr. Agniv Sinha, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Basudeb Mukherjee, Advocate, Mr. Sandip Bhakat, Advocate. Hearing concluded on : March 9, 2016 Judgment on : March 30, 2016 1. Although the dispute that this Bench is called upon to examine is between a political party on the one hand and a nationalized bank on the other, the basic question that would engage the attention of this Bench is, whether the wish of a person, who is no longer alive in this mortal world, should be allowed to prevail over a technical objection.2. The aforesaid question emerges in view of the facts narrated hereafter.3. Tushar Kanti Das Purakayastha (since deceased), during his lifetime, maintained a savings bank account (hereafter the sa...
Tag this Judgment!The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. Vijaya Bank and Ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-29-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE G.A.2628 OF2009C.S.266OF2008The State Trading Corporation of India LTD.-VsVijaya Bank & ORS.CORAM: HONBLE Mr.JUSTICE HARISH TANDON For Deutsche Bank : For the Plaintiff : For Respondent No.2 : Judgment on : Mr.Ranjan Bachawat, Sr.Adv., Mr.Sayan Roy Chowdhury,Adv., Ms.Pubali Sinha Chowdhury, Adv.Mr.Ratnanko Banerjee, Sr.Adv., Mr.Kuldeep Mullick, Adv., Mr.Kausik Chatterjee, Adv., Mr.Asok Bhaumick, Adv.Mr.Mousumi Bhattacharjee, Adv., Mr.T.Aich, Adv.29/03/2016 Harish Tandon, J.: It would be unnecessary to go into extensive details of the facts as pure question of law is raised at the time of entertaining G.A.2628 of 2009 filed by Deutsche Bank for vacation, variation and modification of interim order passed in the suit without seeking its impleadment and/or addition as party in the suit. In a suit for declaration that the Respondent No.1 is not liable to make any payments under the letter of credit dated 22nd ...
Tag this Judgment!United Tyres Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Board of Trustees for the Port of ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-29-2016
ORDER SHEET GA495of 2016 With WP843of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE UNITED TYRES PVT.LTD.& ANR. Versus BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR THE PORT OF KOLKATA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 29th March, 2016. Appearance: Mr.Jaydip Kar, Sr.Adv.Mr.Sourav Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.U.S.Menon, Adv.Mr.Abhirup Chakraborty, Adv.for the petitioneRs.Mr.Hirak Kumar Mitra, Sr.Adv.Mr.Ayan Banerjee, Adv.for the respondents. The Court : GA no.495 of 2016 is an application for amendment of the writ petition. The writ petition contains challenge to notice dated 20th April, 2007 by which the land manager on behalf of the Board of Trustees for the Port of Kolkata notified the petitioner no.1 to quit, vacate and deliver clear, vacant, encumbered and peaceful possession of the property as detailed in the Schedule thereunder for having committed gross violation of the fundamental condition of lease. It was mentioned in the notice that in default there wou...
Tag this Judgment!Idbi Bank Limited Vs. All India Employees Association and
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-29-2016
TA No.23 of 2016 CS No.95 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IDBI BANK LIMITED -VersusALL INDIA EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION & ORS.Appearance: Mr.Surojit Nath Mitra, Sr.Adv.Mr.Mainak Bose, Adv.Mr.Siddhartha Banerjee, Adv.Mr.Paritosh Sinha, Adv...for the plaintiff. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date : 29th March, 2016. The Court : The instant application is taken out by IDBI Bank Limited for an order of injunction restraining the respondents, who are seven different trade union organizations of the plaintiff bank. The averments made in the application would reveal that the Government of India was holding nearly 81% of its equity share capital directly and 8% and odd indirectly thus having nearly 88% of equity share capital of the plaintiff bank. The bank alleges that it has suffered a huge loss to the tune of Rs.1929 crores during the period from 1st April, 2015 to 31st December, 2015 and in the last quarter of December, it has ...
Tag this Judgment!International Seaports (Haldia) Pvt. Limited Vs. Steel Authority of In ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-22-2016
AP No.47 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Original Side International Seaports (Haldia) Pvt. Limited Vs. Steel Authority of India Limited For the petitioner:- Mr. Ranjan Bachawat Sr. Advocate Mr. Jayanta Banerjee.Advocate Mr. Debnath Ghosh Mr. Sanjay Ginodia Mr. Biswaprada Mullick Mr. Sayan Roy Chowdhury Mr. Manoj Kumar TiwariAdvocates For the Respondent:- Mr. Pradip Kumar GhoshSr. Advocate Mr. Aryak Dutta Mr. Dipankar DasAdvocates Judgement On: - 22.03.2016 I.P. MUKERJI, J.In or around 1998 Kolkata Port Trust decided to build a fully mechanised multipurpose berth (No.4A) at Haldia Dock Complex. It did not propose to build and operate it itself, but wanted to entrust it with a contractor. It invited tenders to build, manage and maintain it. On 17th September, 1999 Haldia Dock Complex, on behalf of the Kolkata Port Trust, issued a letter of intent to International Seaports (India) Pvt. Ltd. to construct and maintain a multipurpose Berth 4A in Ha...
Tag this Judgment!Eih Limited Vs. Ms. Nadia a. Virji
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-22-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION G.A.218 OF2013with C.S.354 OF2012EIH LIMITED -versus Ms.NADIA A. VIRJ.CORAM: HONBLE Mr.JUSTICE HARISH TANDON For the Petitioner For the Plaintiff Judgment on : Mr.Ravi Kapoor, Mr.S Sarkar, Mr.Debdut Mukherjee. Mr.Jayanta Mitra, Ld Adv Gen; Mr.S Sen, Mr.D Dutta. 22.03.2016 HARISH TANDON, J.: G.A.218 of 2013 is taken out by the defendant for rejection of the plaint primarily on the ground that the suit is barred by law. Essentially this is an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code, though such provision does not apply in stricto sensu to the High Court exercising ordinary original civil jurisdiction in view of Order 49 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Such applications are frequently entertained not under Order 7 Rule 11, but the prevalent practice is to take off the plaint from the file. Principally the application of such nature is dealt with on the principles of Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code and, therefore, ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »