Kolkata Court October 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.
Ramsarup Industries Ltd. Vs. Nauranglal Agarwal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-04-2010
The Court : There will be an order in terms of prayer (a) of the petition. This appeal is directed against an order passed on 31st August, 2010 admitting the petition whereby the Hon'ble First Court admitted the winding-up petition to the extent of Rs.1.25 Crores and the balance amount to the tune of Rs.1,92,52,851/- was relegated to a suit with a direction to the respondent company to furnish a bank guarantee and further directed that the petitioning creditor will not encase the bank guarantee without the leave of the Civil Court. Mr. Talukdar, Sr. Advocate appearing in support of the appeal contended that his client is agreeable to pay off the dues of the company if some breathing time is granted to the appellant. Accordingly, we direct the appellant to pay an initial sum of Rs.25,00,000/- to be paid to the respondent in two installments. The first of such payment of Rs.15,00,000/- is to be made on or before 15th October, 2010 and the balance Rs.10,00,000/- is to be paid on or before...
M/S. Raiganj Flour Mill Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-04-2010
The Court : The petitioner owns and operates a flour mill at Uttar Dinajpur. The mill of the petitioner company was selected for sub-allocation of BPL (below poverty line) wheat per month for conversion into fortified atta and for packaging the same into 750 gm packets. An agreement was apparently executed by the State of West Bengal represented by the District Controller of Food and Supplies, Uttar Dinajpur, and the petitioner No.1. The petitioner is purportedly aggrieved by suspension of supply of BPL wheat to the petitioner for the month of September 2010. According to the petitioner, allotment was suspended without any intimation. A show cause notice dated August 25, 2010 was, however, issued to the petitioner wherein it was alleged that the petitioner had been supplying hand packed atta instead of packing done by automatic or semi automatic packaging machines in utter violation of departmental guideline. The petitioner gave a detailed reply to the show cause notice by its letter d...
Srei Equipment Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mr. Basanta Lal Singh and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-04-2010
The Court : There will be an order in terms of prayer (a) of the petition. This appeal is directed against the order dated 14.9.2010. It appears that the admitted dues as has been stated by the Hon'ble First Court is less than Rs.7,00,000/-. The respondent has already handed over a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- by way of pay order No.202280 dated 20.9.2010 drawn on ICICI Bank to the appellant in Court today to show their bonfire. We direct that a further sum of Rs.1,50,000/- should be paid by the respondent to the appellant by tomorrow and the balance amount to be paid by the respondent in two monthly instalments. The first of such instalment is to be paid on or before 15.11.2010 and thereafter on or before 15.12.2010 to wipe out the whole dues of the appellant. The amount so directed to be paid by the respondent is only with regard to the application so filed before the Court.We also grant liberty to the respondent to tender the said amount of Rs.1,50,000/- to the appellant at Jamshedpur. Afte...
Eyeglobal Technologies Pvt Ltd. Vs. Ispat Industries Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-04-2010
The Court : This matter was adjourned earlier on the ground of non appearance of the respondent. We directed the appellant to serve a further notice on the respondent and fixed the matter today to enable the respondent to appear before us. In spite of service of notice, none appears on behalf of the respondent to oppose the prayer of the appellant. This application has been filed for condo nation of delay of 58 days in filing the appeal. The grounds for condo nation of delay which have been sought to be made have been stated in paragraph-3 of the application, which is reproduced herein below: The appellant states that the appellants are based in Mumbai and has no office in Kolkata. The earlier Advocate-on-Record forwarded the certified copy of the said order on 16th June, 2010 and the same was received by the appellant on 18th June, 2010. Thereafter, the appellant based in Mumbai, sought legal opinion on the said order from the advocates in Mumbai. The appellant was not satisfied with ...
Suresh Khemka and anr. Vs. Ashok Kumar Agarwala and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-04-2010
The Court: The claim in the suit is in respect of certain shares said to have been held by the plaintiffs in the fourth defendant company. The plaintiffs version is evident from a letter dated March 5, 2010 issued to the first defendant. It is the plaintiffs case that the first defendant had cordial business relations with the first plaintiff who had approached the first plaintiff in the year 2002 for purchase of 3600 shares in the fourth defendant company held by the plaintiffs. 2 According to the plaintiffs, the first plaintiff did not agree to sell such shares since the shares of such company were then neither listed nor frequently traded. The plaintiffs say that the first defendant obtained the share certificates relating to the said 3600 shares and also obtained share transfer forms relating thereto on the first defendants representation that the first defendant would not act upon the share transfer forms without previous reference to the first plaintiff. The plaintiffs claim that...
Guardian Laboratories Pvt Ltd. Vs. Yogesh Daftari
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-04-2010
The Court : There will be an order in terms of prayer (a) of the petition. This appeal is directed against an order passed by the Hon'ble First Court on April 26, 2010. On the basis of the facts and pleadings placed before the Hon'ble First Court, the Hon'ble First Court found that the company in its affidavit alleged that the bills and challans of the petitioner were not genuine and proper because the times which were supplied to the company, the quantities and rates were not properly fixed by agreeing between the parties prior to raising such bills. The statement would imply that the petitioner effected the supply to the company and the petitioner raised bills on the company which was duly received by the company.The company did not raise any objection with regard thereto and it further appears that notice was also served under section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 since the company has failed and neglected to pay the debts of the petitioning creditor. In these circumstances, an app...
Susnita Saha Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-01-2010
THE COURT: As directed by this Court inspection report has been filed by the Director General, West Bengal Fire and Emergency Services and so also by the Director General, Building (II) of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation in respect of the subject premises. In the inspection report filed on behalf of the Director General, Building (II) of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation it has been specifically 2stated that the concerned Executive Engineer has been directed to initiate proceedings under section 400(I) read with Section 416 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 and action in the matter is in process in accordance with law. We are quite sure that the authorities will do the needful and will not compound any unauthorized construction, that is, by way of addition or alterations or erection of a structure which is not permissible under the Act and Building rules and regulations as the matter is subjudice. In so far as the inspection report submitted by the Director General, Wes...
Magma Fincorp Ltd. Vs. Balwinder Kaur Padda and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-01-2010
The Court : Leave is granted under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent subject to the question of its requirement. This is a section 9 application. It is founded on a hire purchase agreement between the petitioner and the respondent no.1. It is moved ex perte on the apprehension that if notice of this application was given to the respondents, they would remove the subject matter of the agreement, which is a vehicle, from the reach of the court. Prima facie it appears that there have been defaults in payment of installments by the respondents. The vehicle is located in Aurangabad, Maharashtra, it is submitted. In the circumstances, I pass an order in terms of prayer (a) of the petition restricted to symbolic possession and inventory only. Ms. Sujata Sengupta, Advocate (Bar Association Room No.1) is appointed Receiver at a remuneration of 700 Gms to be paid by the petitioner initially. I also pass an order in terms of prayer (b) of the petition. I make it clear that the Receiver will not int...
Hindustan Mitra Club and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-01-2010
The Court :-The petitioners are aggrieved by the fact that the Commissioner of Kolkata Police has not granted them permission for repair of their Club Tent & Wooden Floor at Maidan. Seeking permission the petitioners submitted application dated October 9, 2004 (at p. 100). The Defence Authority permitted the petitioners to carry out the same repair works (at p.96). The Kolkata Police having only supervisory powers have refused to give permission for the reason that an appeal filed by them is pending before this Court. The Kolkata Police issued a show cause notice and questioning that the petitioners moved this Court under art.226 in 2000. The show cause notice was quashed holding that Kolkata Police, having only supervisory powers, had no jurisdiction to issue the show cause notice. Feeling aggrieved by the order of the Single Bench dated April 23, 2002 Kolkata Police lodged an appeal before the Division Bench. No interim order was obtained and no step was taken for hearing of the appe...
Srei Equipment Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ravi Hi Tech Stone Crusher and or ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-01-2010
The Court : Leave is granted under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent subject to the question of its requirement. This is a section 9 application. It is founded on a hire purchase agreement dated 8th August, 2008 between the petitioner and the respondent no.1. The subject matter of the agreement is an equipment. Due to default in payment of installments by the respondents, the petitioner terminated the agreement on 8h September 2010. The dues of the respondents towards the petitioner as on date of termination was Rs.88,90,961/-. Affidavit of service has been filed in Court. It is submitted that the respondents have been served, which submission is accepted. None appears for the respondents. Therefore, on the above prima facie, I pass an order in terms of prayers [a] and [b] of the petition. I appoint Ms. Dipannita Ghosh (Chowdhury), Advocate (Bar Association Room No.8) as Receiver at an initial remuneration of 700 GMs. to be paid by the petitioner. Receiver to file a report by the returna...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »