Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Dec-11-2006
Reported in : 2007(3)ARBLR531(Cal)
1. This appeal is directed against an order passed by our brother Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J. refusing to set aside an award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The undisputed facts of the case briefly stated are as follows:The parties entered into a contract for construction of an Intake Pump House for Mejia Thermal Power Station. The stipulated period for completion of the work was two years which expired on 22nd February, 1991. The work was actually completed on 31st May, 1995. On account of delay in completion of the work Central Concrete & Allied Products Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the contractor') claimed revision of rates besides escalation provided in the contract. The contractor also claimed payment on account of some extra works. The correspondence in this regard commenced with the letter dated 2nd February, 1994. By its letter dated 2nd February, 1994 the contractor raised 22 claims which included a claim on account of general revision of r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Nov-28-2006
Reported in : 2007CriLJ1705
P.N. Sinha, J.1. This appeal by the appellants is directed against the judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Bankura in Sessions Trial No. 1(7) 1993 (Sessions Case No. 3(8) 1992). The appellants 1 to 4 were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for eight years each and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- each in default to suffer further R. I. for one year each for the offence under Section 304 Part II read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code , (in short I. P. C.). Appellants 1 and 2 were also sentenced with appellant No. 5 to suffer imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- each i.d. to suffer imprisonment for two months for the offence under Section 323 read with Section 149 of I.P.C., and hence this appeal.2. The prosecution case in a nutshell, is that, on 13-9-1990 at about 2.30 p. m. the appellants accompanied by 15 others as named in the FIR started cutting paddy from the land of informant Niranjan Singha M...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Nov-13-2006
Reported in : 2007(1)CHN372
Prabir Kumar Samanta, J.1. This appeal is directed against the Order No. 4 dated 2nd February, 2005 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Malda in M.A.C. Case No. 323 of 2004. By the impugned order the learned Tribunal had allowed the application by the respondent No. 3 praying for dismissal of the said motor accident claim case.2. An application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was filed by the respondent No. 3 as well as the appellants jointly. The respondent No. 3 is the widow of the deceased victim, while both the appellants are the unmarried sisters of him. It was contended on behalf of the respondent No. 3 that she being the widow of the deceased is entitled to the amount of compensation alone and, therefore, the joint petition filed by the respondent No. 3 along with the appellants who are the sisters of the deceased was to be dismissed. It is on record that respondent No. 3 alone has further filed an independent claim case, being M.A.C No. 352 of 2004 u...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Decided on : Sep-28-2006
Reported in : (2008)111ITD97(Kol.)
1. This appeal is directed against an order dated November 12, 2001 passed by the Director of Income Tax (Exemptions), Kolkata ["DI(E)"] Under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). The assessee, a society registered under the West Bengal Societies Registration Act, 1961 on October 4, 1999, in its application dated November 5, 2001 had requested for registration Under Section 12AA from its inception but the DI(E) granted such registration with effect from April 1, 2001.2. There is a delay of 4 years 4 months and 12 days in preferring this appeal. A duly sworn affidavit of the assessee's Director has been filed explaining the reasons for the delay. The material contents of the said affidavit may be summarised thus: (a) The assessee was registered as a society with the mission to improve the quality of life of the underprivileged women and children living in difficult circumstances, particularly the families and children living on the pavements of Kolkata. (b) Most of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Sep-27-2006
Reported in : 2007(2)CHN713
Pranab Kumar Deb, J.1. The two revisional applications being C.O. No. 4305 of 2005 and C.O. No. 866 of 2006 filed by the Bijul Pharma-Chem (P) Ltd. have been heard along with the revisional application being C.O. No. 3287 of 2005 filed by M/S. E. R. Squibb & Sons LLC The revisional application being C.O. No. 4305 of 2005 has been directed against the order dated 28.10.05, whereby the petition under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment of the prayer portion of the plaint was rejected. The revisional application being No. 866 of 2006 was directed against the order dated 28.02.06 passed by the learned District Judge in Misc. Appeal No. 237 of 2004, whereby the prayer for extension of the period of supply was rejected. The revisional application being No. 3287 of 2005 was filed by M/s. Squibb & Sons LLC challenging the order dated 12th May, 2005, in Misc. Appeal No. 237 of 2004, whereby the learned District Judge, Howrah was pleased to extend the period of supply of goods in terms of the cont...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Aug-29-2006
Reported in : AIR2007Cal38
ORDERKalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. In all these bunch of execution applications the point has been raised for consideration, as to whether in view of amendment of Section 39 with insertion of Sub-section (4) of Civil Procedure Code this Court being executing Court has any authority to execute the decree passed by it against any person residing or touching property situated outside the local limit of its jurisdiction or not. One of the Learned single Judge of this Court in case of Smt. Uma Kanoria v. Pradip Kumar Daga reported in : AIR2003Cal162 while interpreting the amended provision of the section has held that in view of insertion of aforesaid Sub-section (4) the Court which has passed the decree, is not authorized to execute the decree against the person or property residing and situate outside the local limit of its jurisdiction. The Learned Counsels on behalf of the respective persons in all these matters have advanced argument in both ways 'which are summarized hereunder.2. Mr. A....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Aug-18-2006
Reported in : (2007)1CALLT227(HC)
Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.1. One Nirmal Kumar Das died leaving him surviving the parties above named by making a will. The widow, younger son and daughter being the respondents above named applied for letters of administration in this Court with a copy of the will annexed. The elder son. the applicant abovenamed, lodged caveat.2. The present application was filed by the elder son for dismissal of the application for letters of administration being P.L.A.N0. 355 of 2001 on the ground that this Court lacked territorial Jurisdiction to entertain the said application. The application for letters of administration was filed by invoking the jurisdiction of this Court on the ground that the deceased had his permanent place of abode a 25/5A, Anathdeb Lane, Calcutta outside the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court as well as the City Civil Court, Calcutta. The place of abode within the territorial jurisdiction of District Judge, 24 Parganas (North). The deceased, however, left immovable property at...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Aug-11-2006
Reported in : AIR2006Cal318,(2006)3CALLT614(HC),2006(4)CHN445
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. I have had the benefit of going through erudite draft judgment of my learned brother. I fully agree with the conclusion arrived at by His Lordship and the consequential order passed by him. However, I wish to add a few words of my own which are as follows:2. The plaintiff Monoj (now deceased) and the appellant were found to have married under Hindu rites and ceremonies. They had led their happy and modestly eventful marital life till 1981 from the date of their marriage. They had produced three children who are successful and pride of any family. Two sons are products of 1IT (Kharagpur) and younger son is enviously placed in his life and working in America and elder son is also not lagging behind, he is in decent employment in the State of Andhra Pradesh. Daughter is also married with an Income-tax Officer. What more a fighting and very lower middle class family could achieve during their struggling marital Me? After 50's they migrated from East-Pakistan now...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jul-11-2006
Reported in : 1(2007)CLT656
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.1. The above application has been taken out by notice of Motion by the defendants No. 1 to 9 for revocation of leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent and leave granted under Order 2 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Code and further to hold that this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit for adjudication since it is a suit for land. Upon reading of the petition being the grounds of the Motion it appears to me that this demurer action has been taken for rejection of the plaint on the ground that no part of cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of this Court and further this is a suit for land. Mr. Haradhan Bandyopadhyay, appearing for the defendants/applicants, at the time of the argument has conceded to the proposition of law that this Court can entertain a suit for enforcement of specific performance of agreement for sale of the immovable property simpliciter but no relief for possession of the, immovable property can be granted in the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : May-15-2006
Reported in : 2007[2]STR315
ORDERArun Kumar Mitra, J.1. The writ petitioner in the instant writ petition challenged the departmental proceeding initiated against him, the final order passed by the Disciplinary Authority and the appellate order passed by the Appellate Authority (being Annexure P-14 to the writ petition).Facts in Brief2. The writ petitioner is a Professor of Statistics working the Indian Statistical Institute (respondent No. 1 herein). Since 1991 the writ petitioner has been working as Professor and prior to that he was an associated Professor. He is a Ph.D.3. On 26.12.2003 the petitioner allegedly took a book under the name. 'Real Mathematical Analysis' by G.G. Pugh. The petitioner did not make any entry before the Librarian and/ or took the book inside his sweater and tried to get away with the book. The librarian, on suspicion, apprehended him and he gave a note to the Librarian that he took forgetting to issue the book from the counter. Such note of the petitioner has been made Annexure P-l to ...
Tag this Judgment!