Kolkata Court October 2007 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
imperial Tubes (P) Ltd. and anr. Vs. Board for Industrial and Financia ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-12-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Cal15,2008(1)CHN480
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, Actg. C.J.1. This mandamus appeal is at the instance of unsuccessful writ-petitioners and is directed against order dated 11th April, 2007 passed by a learned single Judge by which His Lordship dismissed the writ-application filed by the appellants in which they basically challenged the order dated 18th December, 2006 passed by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (hereinafter referred to as the 'BIFR') in Case No. 230 of 2004 recording that the said case had abated in terms of Section 15 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the SICA) and further challenged the action on the part of the respondent/secured creditors in taking action in terms of Section 13(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Securitisation Act').2. There is no dispute that the appellant No. 1 took loan from the Bank of Ind...
Allahabad Bank Vs. Indo Marketing and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-12-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Cal40,(2008)1CALLT140(HC),2008(1)CHN56
Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J.1. This revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the Judgment and/or order dated 28th December, 2006 passed by the learned Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal at Calcutta in Appeal No. 43 of 2003 modifying the Judgment and decree dated 15th June, 1995 passed by the learned Debts Recovery Tribunal, Calcutta in T.A. No. 15 of 1994 at the instance of the defendant/opposite party No. 3 herein.2. In 1984, the plaintiff/petitioner (Bank) lent and advanced a sum of Rs. 26,00,000/- to the opposite party No. 1 herein on hypothecation of plant, machinery and stocks in the factory premises situated at Jaikuni, Goragachha Road, Kolkata-700 048. The defendant No. 2 stood as a guarantor for the said loan.3. The opposite party No. 1 defaulted in payment of instalment towards the loan amount. As a result, a sum of Rs. 22,11,618.62p. was accumulated towards the said loan account inclusive of interest as on 29th February, 1988. Ins...
Debdas Ghosh Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-12-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)CHN316
Girish Chandra Gupta, J.1. This is a Death Reference-cum-appeal arising out of a judgment dated 18th October, 2006, convicting the accused under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, and a further order dated 27th October, 2006, by which the accused was sentenced to death directing that he should be hanged by the neck till his death.2. The prosecution case briefly stated is as follows:On 27th June, 2005, at about 3 p.m. the accused, Debdas Ghosh, entered into the tenanted house of Kumari Tapati Mondal. He assaulted her on the head four or five times with a hammer with an object to kill her. She suffered bleeding injury. She was admitted to Kharika Mathani Prathamik Hospital. Since her condition was critical, she was shifted to Midnapur Medical College Hospital where she died at 7.30 in the morning on 28th June, 2005. The accused was charged under Section 302 and Section 448 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.3. The prosecution has examined ...
Srei Infrastructure Finance Limited Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-12-2007
Reported in: 2009(238)ELT579(Cal),2008[11]STR457
ORDERAniruddha Bose, J.1. The petitioner No. 1 herein is a non-banking financial company engaged in the business, inter alia, of lease financing and hire-purchase. The rest of the petitioners are directors and officers of the petitioner-company.2. In this writ petition the main grievance of the petitioners is over the process of investigation and in particular the manner of investigation of the petitioners on the allegation of non-payment of service tax. The petitioners have challenged in this writ petition the legislative competence of the Union Government to levy service tax on hire-purchase agreement and lease financing services. Admittedly both these items have been covered under the provisions of Chapters 5 and 5A (sic) (Chapter V and VA) of the Finance Act, 1994. On this aspect the petitioners case is that the transaction as regards services being rendered by the petitioners, the State Legislature has exclusive right to levy any taxes thereon. This aspect of the matter, I am of t...
Molay Kumar Acharya Vs. Chairman-cum-managing Director, W.B. State Ele ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-12-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Cal47,2008(3)CHN27
ORDERTapen Sen, J.1. In this Writ Petition, the petitioner has prayed for an Order commanding upon the Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 to give a new Electricity connection in his name in the premises situated in the first Floor of FC-110; Sector-3, Salt Lake City, Kolkata.2. It appears that this case was initially placed before another Hon'ble Single Judge of this Court on 4-6-2007 when, after considering the submissions, it was observed that the petitioner cannot be allowed to continue to live in darkness and the Respondent Authorities were therefore directed to accept the Application of the petitioner without insisting on the No Objection Certificate to be issued by the Landlord or the owner of the House. The said Hon'ble single Judge did take into consideration that there was a strained relationship between the parties but nevertheless, after making the aforementioned observations, directed that the Authorities would accept the Application of the petitioner in the manner referred to abov...
Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Major General Arun Roye, Avsm, Vsm a ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-12-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)CHN192
Biswanath Somadder, J.1. In the present proceeding before us, two appeals have been filed against the judgment and order dated 25th April, 2006, passed by the Hon'ble First Court in W.P. No. 25155 (W) of 2005. One appeal, being M.A.T. No. 2965 of 2006 has been filed by Union of India and Ors. and the other, being M.A.T. No. 2255 of 2006, has been filed by the writ petitioner.2. Before we look into the judgment in detail, the facts, in brief, as it unfolds from the impugned judgment, needs to be discussed:(i) An Army Officer holding the rank of a Major General filed the writ petition, inter alia, challenging various decisions of the superior authorities in connection with his service career, including the matter relating to his claim for promotion to the post of Lieutenant General.(ii) At the time of hearing of the matter before the Hon'ble First Court, the writ petitioner was posted as G.O.C., Bengal Area. He was aggrieved by various decisions of the superior authorities, which also in...
R.P. Agarwalla and Bros. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. National Insurance Company and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-11-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)CHN750
Alok Kumar Basu, J.1. Respondent National Insurance Company as plaintiff filed Title Suit No. 148 of 1981 which was subsequently numbered as T.S. No. 2 of 1984 for a decree of specific performance of contract in respect of suit premises being flat No. 25 of premises No. 5B, Sarat Bose Road, Kolkata against the appellant R.P. Agarwalla & Bros., while R.P. Agarwalla & Bros., filed Title Suit No. 49 of 1980 which was subsequently numbered as T.S. No. 3 of 1984 in respect of self-same suit premises for eviction of National Insurance Co. as well as respondent Nos. 2 and 3. Both the suits were taken up together for disposal by the learned Assistant District Judge, 6th Court, Alipore and by a judgment dated 22nd December, 1984, the learned Judge decreed Title Suit No. 2 of 1984 on contest and dismissed Title Suit No. 3 of 1984 on contest. The learned Judge in his order dated 22nd December, 1984 held that National Insurance Co. as plaintiff was entitled to get a decree for renewal of the lease...
Navrojee and Company Vs. Magnolia Soda FountaIn P. Ltd., Sutton and So ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-11-2007
Reported in: [2008]143CompCas44(Cal),[2009]96SCL233(Cal)
Sanjib Banerjee, J.1. The same petitioner has sought winding up of three companies on the ground of the companies being unable to pay their debts. The matters in issue are identical except as to the quantum of claim in the three petitions.2. The petitioner claims to have supplied divers varieties of Indian Made Foreign Liquor ('IMFL') to the companies for a substantial period. The petition was filed in the name of a proprietorship concern of which one Erach Medhora was formerly the prop'rietor. The petitions were verified by the widow of the erstwhile proprietor describing herself as the 'proprietress of the petitioner-company'. A point was taken in the affidavits filed by the companies that the proprietorship concern was non-existent upon the death of Erach Medhora and that the petitions were not maintainable. Applications were made for amending the cause titles relating to the three petitions. The companies opposed the applications on the ground that the claim being the subject-matte...
Karamchand Thapar and Bros. (Coal Sales) Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-11-2007
Reported in: 2008[11]STR459,[2009]19STT339
ORDERAniruddha Bose, J.1. The writ petitioner is a company engaged in the business of leasing operation and supervisory work for supply of coal to various power plants. The petitioners had applied for registration under the Service Tax Act on 2nd November, 2005 describing their service as Business Auxiliary Services. Case of Mr. Poddar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner is that under the provisions of paragraph 4 (sic) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, there is provision for deemed registration if the registration certificate is not granted within a period of 7 days. The petitioner's grievance is that there has been no rejection of that application but, on the other hand, after twenty-two months of making of that application the petitioner has been registered in the category of clearing and forwarding services. The rate of tax appears to be same under both these categories but in the event the petitioner comes within the latter category, his liability to pay Service Tax...
Gyananendranath Shil Vs. Superintending Engineer and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-09-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Cal19,2008(2)CHN219
ORDERK.J. Sengupta, J.1. This writ petition is directed against an order passed by the Superintending Engineer, Electricity Department, A & N Administration, who in compliance of the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court dated 5-3-2007 has decided not to give connection of the domestic electric supply line to the premises of the petitioner.2. It is appropriate to record the relevant portion of the direction given by the learned single Judge earlier:Regarding electric connection, this Court directs the Superintending Engineer, Electricity Department to take effective steps for providing the petitioners house with electricity since this Court is satisfied that the title suit filed by the neighbours of the petitioners is not in respect of the property in question. In the event the respondent No. 4 is of the opinion that the electric connection cannot be given to the petitioners without hearing the neighbours, he shall be at liberty to give notice to the neighbours and hea...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »