Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract act 1872 Court: kolkata appellate Year: 2011 Page 6 of about 54 results (0.037 seconds)

Feb 15 2011 (HC)

Baidyanath Modak. Vs. Smt. Swapna Modak and ors.

Court : Kolkata Appellate

Decided on : Feb-15-2011

1. challenge is to the order dated september 5, 2006 passed by the learned additional district judge, second court, hooghly in misc. appeal no.84 of 1999 thereby reversing the order no.30 dated june 8, 1999 passed by the learned civil judge (senior division), first court, hooghly in title suit no.62 of 1997.2. the petitioner was the defendant no.1 of the title suit filed by the plaintiff/opposite party. the plaintiff instituted the said suit for declaration and partition. in that suit, the defendants in two sets, namely, the defendant nos.1 to 13 in one set and the defendant nos.14 & 15, namely, the opposite party nos.2 & 3, in another set, are contesting the said suit by filing separate written statements. the defendant nos.1 to 13 filed an application for temporary injunction under order 39 rule 1 & 2 of the c.p.c. the defendant nos.14 & 15 filed an objection against that application with the caption objection but, in fact, it was a counter-claim to have a right of possession of common place, such as, staircase, right to go to the roof for repair, etc. the learned trial judge allowed both the petitions by the order no.30 dated june 8, 1999. being aggrieved, the defendant nos.1 and others preferred a misc. appeal being misc. appeal no.84 of 1999 which was disposed of by the impugned order thereby reversing the order no.30 dated june 8, 1999 passed by the learned trial judge and giving liberty to the defendant nos. 14 & 15 to file separate objection against the application .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 14 2011 (HC)

Sambhu Nath SamantA. Vs. Gobinda Chandra Metya and ors.

Court : Kolkata Appellate

Decided on : Feb-14-2011

1. this application is at the instance of the defendant and is directed against the order no.177 dated june 16, 2008 passed by the learned civil judge (junior division), third court at tamluk, district purba medinipur in title suit no.195 of 1985 thereby accepting the report submitted by the learned commissioner holding local investigation.2. the plaintiff/opposite party herein instituted a suit being title suit no.195 of 1985 before the learned civil judge (senior division), third court, medinipur against the petitioner and other opposite parties for eviction and recovery of possession of a licensee, that is, the petitioner. in that suit, the plaintiff has contended that he is the owner of the l.r. dag no.841 and r.s. plot no.303 in the district - purba medinipur and the defendant/petitioner herein was given possession of the same by the plaintiff as per agreement between the parties. the petitioner is contesting the said suit denying the materials allegations contained in the plaint and it is his specific case that the suit property is not situated on the land of the plaintiff but on the government acquisitioned land of the 6th national highway. thereafter, on the basis of pleadings of both the parties, a survey passed commissioner was appointed to hold local investigation at the instance of the petitioner to decide whether the land possessed by the defendant/petitioner herein appertains to dag no.303. the learned commissioner held an inspection in presence of both the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 10 2011 (HC)

Rabi Kumar Das. Vs. Sumitra Bala Dasi and ors.

Court : Kolkata Appellate

Decided on : Feb-10-2011

1. this application is at the instance of the defendant no.1(ka) and is directed against the order no.174 dated march 3, 2009 passed by the learned judge (junior division), second court, bolpur, district - birbhum in title suit no.38 of 1989 thereby rejecting the petition dated february 19, 2009 filed by him.2. the short fact is that in an appeal arising out of the said title suit, the petitioner/appellant filed a petition under order 41 rule 27 of the c.p.c. in the said title appeal being title appeal no.17 of 1998. that application was filed for marking a certain deed of sale dated april 25, 1999 as exhibit. that application under order 41 rule 27 of the c.p.c. was rejected, but, the suit was remanded back directing the parties to adduce evidence. thereafter, the petitioner filed the said petition dated february 19, 2009 for marking the deed of sale as exhibit, which was rejected by the impugned order. being aggrieved, this application has been filed.3. the short question in the matter is that whether the learned trial judge was justified in rejecting the petition dated february 19, 2009 thereby not accepting the said deed of sale into evidence.4. upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on going through the materials on record, i find that the title appeal being title appeal no.17 of 1998 arising out the said suit was allowed on contest directing the learned trial court for fresh trial in the light of the observations made in the body of the judgment. by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 21 2011 (HC)

Smt. Padmabati MitrA. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Kolkata Appellate

Decided on : Feb-21-2011

1. the petitioner herein, is the widow of an employee of geological survey of india, eastern region who was posted at rangpo drilling camp, sikkim as camp-in-charge at the relevant time. 2. the said employee, namely, the husband of the petitioner met with a motor accident on 18 th october, 1982 along with other employees while returning from darjeeling. the vehicle in question belonged to the department namely, geological survey of india ltd. 3. in view of the aforesaid motor accident, the husband of the petitioner and some other persons died in spot. the respondent authorities, thereafter, sanctioned family pension to the petitioner under ccs (pension) rules, 1972 with effect from 19 th october 1982. the petitioner also filed a motor accident claim case demanding payment of compensation and insurance amount. the said motor accident claim case was registered as macc case no. 34 of 1985 and 35 of 1985. after final disposal of the motor accident claim case the petitioner herein was awarded compensation of rs. 1,25,000/- and furthermore, rs.15, 000/- was awarded towards insurance claim. the son of the petitioner was also given appointment on compassionate ground by the respondent authorities due to the aforesaid sudden death of her husband while he was in service. 4. although, the petitioner herein was allowed to enjoy family pension under the ccs (pension) rules, 1972, the said petitioner claimed family pension under ccs (extraordinary) rules, 1939, since the husband of the .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //