Kolkata Court January 2010 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.
Guru Ispat Limited and anr. Vs. the State Bank of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-11-2010
Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. The petitioners in this Article 226 petition dated July 2, 1999 are seeking a mandamus commanding the State Bank of India (in short SBI) 'to forthwith release the fixed deposit amounts as mentioned at paragraph 2' of the petition.2. Case of the petitioners stated in the para.2 of the petition is as follows:2. Your petitioner No. 1 for its business purposes obtained a Bank Guarantee of the Respondent No. 1 at its Chowringhee Branch, for Rs. 10 lacs for a period of 1 years. As a condition thereof, your petitioners were asked to keep amounts of Rs. 10 lakhs in Fixed Deposit with the Respondent No. 1 at the said Branch, which your petitioner No. 1 did in 1993, such fixed deposit accounts bearing numbers 608991 and 608992 for 5 lakhs each. At any event, the said Bank Guarantee was not ultimately required and was allowed to lapse in 1994 and from that date, the Fixed Deposit Accounts, which amount to monies lent by the Writ Petitioners to the Bank till maturity, we...
Sst Media Pvt. Ltd. and Dayal Saha and anr. Vs. Official Liquidator
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-08-2010
Girish Chandra Gupta, J.1. SST Media Private Limited running a news channel by the name of Kolkata TV was directed to be wound up by this Court on 21st May 2009 in C.P. No. 39 of 2009 at the instance of one of the creditors thereof. Several other winding up petitions filed by the creditors are pending. The liability of the company is in the region of Rs. 74 Crores, a break-up whereof provided by the applicants themselves reads as follows:--------------------------------------------------------------Sl. No. NAME AMOUNT--------------------------------------------------------------Current Liability--------------------------------------------------------------1. Sundry Creditors 214,463,881.57--------------------------------------------------------------2. Term Loan 167,310,693.24--------------------------------------------------------------3. Unsecured Loan 24,341,464.00--------------------------------------------------------------4. Statutory 54,316,829.16--------------------------------...
Hindustan National Glass and Industries Limited Vs. Ganesh Kumar Agarw ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-08-2010
Sanjib Banerjee, J.1. The first petition in point of time, GA No. 1881 of 2009 is the plaintiff's principal interlocutory petition in this suit for specific performance of an agreement to transfer a mining lease. GA No. 2506 of 2009 is the defendant's vacating application that is now irrelevant as the plaintiff's application has ripened for final hearing. The defendant's application for revocation of leave granted under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent on the ground that this is a suit for land has recently failed.2. The plaintiff refers to a memorandum of understanding of August 4, 2008. The first recital records that the defendant has a mining lease for an area of 466.67 hectare in district Sikar, Rajasthan. There is a reference to an annexure 'A' in the first recital. The first Clause of the memorandum of understanding records as follows:1. The understandings, as expressed in terms of these presents, shall commence from the date hereof and shall remain in force initially for a period...
Sri Sanchit Bansal and anr. Vs. the Joint Admission Board (Jab) and or ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-06-2010
ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE:Learned single Judge initially passed an order directing the institute to form a panel of experts comprising of statistical experts from Indian Institute of Management, Joka, Jadavpur University and Calcutta University to obtain their views on the procedure for fixation of cut-off mark. The learned Judge by the same judgment and order dated August 27, 2007 later stayed the earlier direction for formation of the panel and asked the Chairman of the Joint Entrance Board to satisfy the Court about the fixation of the cut-off mark. The matter was, thereafter, heard from time to time and the hearing was concluded by His Lordship on September 26, 2007. His Lordship, by judgment and order dated June 13, 2008, finally disposed of the matter by observing as follows:In the facts of the instant case, the writ petitioners have not been able to demonstrate, by producing even a scrap of paper that they had lodged their protest with regard to the declaration given by ...
Kartick Chandra Hembram and anr. Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-06-2010
Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. The petitioners in this Article 226 petition dated March 24, 2009 are seeking a mandamus commanding the State Transport Authority, West Bengal to grant them a permanent stage carriage permit for the route Bagmundi - Kolkata.2. The petitioners submitted the requisite application, Annexure P1 at p.43. Alleging that their application was not considered by the transport authority, they moved WP No. 2184 of 2003 under Article 226. The petition was disposed of by an order dated November 18, 2003 directing the transport authority to dispose of the application.3. By a decision dated December 30, 2003, Annexure P5 at p. 50, the transport authority rejected the application for the following reasons:Considering inadequate space in the existing bus stand for halting more buses, the magnitude of air/vehicular pollution, traffic congestion and insufficient road space to bear further traffic load in Kolkata and Howrah, State Transport Authority, West Bengal, therefore, reso...
DolphIn Agencies Private Limited Vs. Lgw Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-06-2010
Sanjib Banerjee, J.1. The two suits are almost identical save the identity of the defendants. The defendant in either case has applied for rejection of the plaint on the primary ground that the respective suit is barred by law. It is submitted on behalf of the two defendants that a judgment on the one matter would govern the other.2. The documents referred to in this judgment are those found in CS No. 65 of 2009.3. The plaintiff states that the defendant is entitled to duty credits calculated as a percentage of the FOB value of its exports of raw cotton. The plaintiff claims that the defendant entered into an agreement with the plaintiff to transfer the duty credit licences that it was to obtain in favour of the plaintiff at a price of 60 per cent of the value of the licences. Such agreement, according to the plaintiff, would be evident from the defendant's letter of January 10, 2009 which was erroneously marked as January 10, 2008. The plaintiff says that by a government notification ...
Debidas Roy Vs. Ms. Sabitri Chatterjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-05-2010
Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, J.1. This is an appeal against judgement and decree dated November 23, 1990 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Seventh Court at Alipore in Title Appeal No. 15 of 1989 reversing the judgement and decree dated December 12, 1988 passed by the learned Munsif, Second Additional Court at Alipore in Title Suit No. 23 of 1987.2. This appeal arises out of a suit for eviction, inter alia, on the ground of reasonable requirement.3. The defendant is the appellant before this Court.4. Shearing unnecessary details, the plaintiff, who has been an well-known film and stage artist and the owner of the suit house, filed this suit for recovery of possession of the ground floor flat, inter alia, on the ground that she has been suffering from osteo- arthritis and spondylitis and as such she needed the suit flat situated in the ground floor as she has been virtually incapable of climbing of stairs. On or about January 5, 1980 at the time of rehearsal of a drama, the pla...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›