Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Appellant Vs. Respondent

Appellant vs Respondent

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided Mar 02, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1061640

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kolkata High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Appellant

Respondent

Respondent

Excerpt

order sheet ca no.514 of 2007 bifr no.43 of 2004 in the high court at calcutta original side in the matter of : m/s.consolidated fibres & chemicals ltd (in liqn.) before: the hon'ble justice ashoke kumar dasadhikari date :2. d march, 2012. appearance: mr.s.roychoudhury, adv.mr.ronojit choudhury, adv.mr.s.sen, adv.mr.suman chatterjee, adv.mr.kaushik banerjee, adv.the court : pursuant to my order dated january 10, 2012 aditya liquidator to scraps the tune handed of over rs.24 a cheque crore and to was accepted on condition that in case the cheque is dishonoured, the given by mr.sen’s client before the and this undertaking court. occasions the aforesaid cheque of aditya scraps before the bank, but the same 24 official crore deposit of one crore would be forfeited that the was dishonoured. however, on two was presented in that view of the matter, the offer given by aditya scraps is not accepted by this court. the official liquidator is permitted to sell the property to any other person. learned advocate however, mr.kaushik banerjee, appearing on behalf of deepshikha enterprise, submitted that his client is agreeable to purchase the machineries etc.lying at haldia at the price of rs.25 crore 50 thousand.let this offer be accepted on condition that the entire amount of money of rs.25 crore 50 thousand be paid by the said deepshikha enterprise on next wenesday (i.e.7.3.2012) by banker’s cheque/pay order or by demand draft. march 7, 2012, the in case, the payment is not made by official liquidator would be permitted to publish advertisement once again in the newspaper inviting offers from the other bidders or the intending purchasers by way of floating fresh tender. it is needless to mention that the amount of rupees one core deposited by aditya scraps is forfeited pursuant to my earlier order on the basis of the undertaking given by the said aditya scraps. (ashoke kumar dasadhikari, j.) cs, ar(cr)

Full Judgment

ORDER

SHEET CA No.514 of 2007 BIFR No.43 of 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL SIDE In the matter of : M/S.CONSOLIDATED FIBRES & CHEMICALS LTD (IN LIQN.) BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASHOKE KUMAR DASADHIKARI Date :

2. d March, 2012.

Appearance: Mr.S.Roychoudhury, Adv.Mr.Ronojit Choudhury, Adv.Mr.S.Sen, Adv.Mr.Suman Chatterjee, Adv.Mr.Kaushik Banerjee, Adv.The Court : Pursuant to my order dated January 10, 2012 Aditya Liquidator to Scraps the tune handed of over Rs.24 a cheque crore and to was accepted on condition that in case the cheque is dishonoured, the given by Mr.Sen’s client before the and this undertaking Court.

occasions the aforesaid cheque of Aditya Scraps before the bank, but the same 24 Official crore deposit of one crore would be forfeited that the was dishonoured.

However, on two was presented In that view of the matter, the offer given by Aditya Scraps is not accepted by this Court.

The Official Liquidator is permitted to sell the property to any other person.

learned Advocate However, Mr.Kaushik Banerjee, appearing on behalf of Deepshikha Enterprise, submitted that his client is agreeable to purchase the machineries etc.lying at Haldia at the price of Rs.25 crore 50 thousand.Let this offer be accepted on condition that the entire amount of money of Rs.25 crore 50 thousand be paid by the said Deepshikha Enterprise on next Wenesday (i.e.7.3.2012) by banker’s cheque/pay order or by demand draft.

March 7, 2012, the In case, the payment is not made by Official Liquidator would be permitted to publish advertisement once again in the newspaper inviting offers from the other bidders or the intending purchasers by way of floating fresh tender.

It is needless to mention that the amount of rupees one core deposited by Aditya Scraps is forfeited pursuant to my earlier order on the basis of the undertaking given by the said Aditya Scraps.

(ASHOKE KUMAR DASADHIKARI, J.) CS, AR(CR)

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial