Kolkata Court July 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.
Kamalapur Sugar and Industries Ltd. Vs. Gpsk Commodities Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-26-2010
The Court : The entire claim of the petitioning creditor of Rs. 6,60,692/- in paragraph 16 of the winding up petition is admitted by the learned Counsel for the company in Court today. He prays for 24 equal monthly installments to make that payment. Therefore, according to the above admission, there is a debt of Rs. 6,60,692/- payable by the company to the petitioning creditor, as on date. I award the petitioning creditor interest at the rate of 7% per annum, simple interest calculated at yearly rests on the said sum from today. Therefore, the winding up application is admitted. This application is to be published once in The Telegraph and once in Bartaman. Publication in the official gazette is dispensed with. Such publication of advertisement is to be made by three weeks from date. List this winding up application four weeks hence. However, in the event the aforesaid sum with interest calculated on reducing balance principle is paid in 24 equal installments by the company to the peti...
Srei Equipment Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mr.Ranjeet Murlidhar Adsul and an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-26-2010
The Court : Leave is granted under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent subject to the question of its requirement. This Section 9 application was moved on 14th June, 2010 before this Court. By an order of that date this Court directed publication of advertisements in the newspaper. Today, Mr.Banerjee appearing for the petitioner seeks extension of time to make such advertisement. Therefore, the time to effect substituted service, according to the said order dated 14th June, 2010, is extended till two days before the returnable date. However, if the Receiver appointed by me in this order is able to locate the respondents or the equipments, this substituted service need not be effected for the time being. This application is founded on a hire purchase agreement dated 22nd June, 2008 between the petitioner and the respondent no.1. The subject matter of the agreement is an hydraulic excavator, whose value is Rs.22,40,000/-. Due to default in payment of instalments by the respondents, the petit...
Newage Commercial Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Registrar of Companies, West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-26-2010
The Court : This is an application under Section 560(6) of the Companies Act, 1956. The grievance of the petitioners is that the name of the petitioner company has been wrongly struck off the register. I notice that there is some procedural irregularity in the issuance of the notices under Section 560. Sub-sections 1,2,3 of Section 560 contemplate two notices to be first given. The first notice is referred to in Section 560(1). Here, when the registrar has reasonable cause to believe that a company is not carrying on business or is not in operation he is to send out a letter to the company making such enquiry. If no reply is received within one month, he shall within 14 days of expiry of that period send another notice giving a further one months notice to the company to answer the requisition. If that notice is not answered or if the answer shows that the company is not carrying on any business, a publication is to be made in the official gazette and a third notice is to be sent to th...
Sanjib Ghosh Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-26-2010
In this writ application, the petitioner has sought orders on the respondent State Transport Authority to issue a Stage Carriage Permit to the petitioner to operate a vehicle as specified in his application. Section 80(1) and (2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provide as follows : 80. Procedure in applying for and granting permits (1) An application for a permit of any kind may be made at any time. (2) A Regional Transport Authority, State Transport Authority or any prescribed authority referred to in sub-section (1) of Section 66 shall not ordinarily refuse to grant an application for permit of any kind made at any time under this Act. Provided that the Regional Transport Authority, State Transport Authority or any prescribed authority referred to in sub-section (1) of section 66 may summarily refuse the application if the grant of any permit in accordance with the application would have the effect of increasing the number of stage carriages as fixed specified in a notification in th...
Manipur Securities Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Manipur Tea Companey Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-26-2010
The Court : The Central Government has only one objection to sanction of the scheme. Such objection is that the authorized share capital of the transferee company is not sufficient to allot shares to all members of the transferor companies, according to the scheme. Learned Counsel for the petitioner assures the Court that such increase of unauthorized capital will be made expeditiously. On such assurance and condition, this application is allowed. I pass orders in terms of prayers (a) to (e), (i) & (j) of the petition. This application is accordingly allowed. In the event the petitioner files a computerized print out of the scheme and the schedule relating thereto in acceptable form, the Department will append such print out to the certified copy of the order sanctioning the scheme without insisting on a hard-written copy thereof. The applicant will pay cost assessed at 200 GMs to the Central Government. Department and all parties concerned are to act on a signed photocopy of this orde...
Sandip Singha Roy and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-26-2010
In this writ application, the petitioner has sought orders on the respondent State Transport Authority to issue a Stage Carriage Permit to the petitioner to operate a vehicle as specified in his application. Section 80(1) and (2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provide as follows : 80. Procedure in applying for and granting permits (1) An application for a permit of any kind may be made at any time. (2) A Regional Transport Authority, State Transport Authority or any prescribed authority referred to in sub-section (1) of Section 66 shall not ordinarily refuse to grant an application for permit of any kind made at any time under this Act. Provided that the Regional Transport Authority, State Transport Authority or any prescribed authority referred to in sub-section (1) of section 66 may summarily refuse the application if the grant of any permit in accordance with the application would have the effect of increasing the number of stage carriages as fixed specified in a notification in th...
Hindusthan Motors Ltd. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-26-2010
After considering the issues suggested on behalf of the plaintiff and the 1st defendant on the basis of the respective pleadings of the parties, namely the plaintiff and the 1st defendant in the plaint and the written statement respectively, the following issues suggested by the plaintiff are framed: 1. Whether as on the date of the incident of fire, i.e. on 29/6/1986 the subject insurance policy / Interim Protection Note No. 34/65, 34/68 and 34/67 was valid? 2. Whether the Bank Guarantees issued by the Bank of India, 119, Park Street, Kolkata 700 016 (bearing Nos. G/5/50 to G/5/54) were issued for securing the insurance premia against the policies taken by the plaintiff from the 1st defendant? 3. Is the 1st defendant liable to pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 4,34,78,287/- or any other sum in respect of loss relating to stock of goods under the contract of insurance covered under the interim protection note dated 30 April 1986 bearing No. 34/67 as stated in paragraph 21(a) of the pla...
Kartick Ch. Das and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-23-2010
Prasenjit Mandal, J.1. These applications are at the instance of the accused persons and are directed against the proceedings being complaint case Nos. 974 C/2007, 975 C/2007, 976 C/2007, 977 C/2007, 978 C/2007 and 979 C/2007. All the six applications are disposed of by this common judgment as the common question of law is involved in the matters.2. The applicants have preferred these applications for quashing the proceedings lodged against them under Section 14(2) of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 for non-filing of monthly and yearly Returns for the period mentioned in the respective proceedings. The applicants have contended that they submitted the said Returns from time to time but an ex parte order was passed against them under Section 7A of the said Act. Thereafter the applicants preferred review and they were given a chance of hearing and then they complied accordingly. Ultimately, on the basis of the statements available on the record, the c...
The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Shibani Mondal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-23-2010
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. This appeal is at the instance of the Insurance Company and is directed against an award dated 18th December, 2009 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hooghly, in M.A.C. Case No. 351 of 2008 thereby disposing of a proceeding under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act by awarding a total sum of Rs. 2,63,500/- with a direction upon the Insurance Company to pay the said amount within two months from the date of award with further stipulation that in default of such payment, the amount should carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the application till actual payment. The Insurance Company was, however, permitted to realise the said amount from the owner of the vehicle after making payment.2. The claimants, on the other hand, has preferred the cross-objection for enhancement of the amount awarded and also for passing direction for payment of interest on the awarded sum irrespective of the fact whether the Insurance Company...
Sri Tripti Kumar Chatterjee Vs. Sri Arnab Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-23-2010
The Court :- The writ petitioner represented by Mr. Moitra submitted that he has already obtained all requisite permission and licences for the purpose of carrying on business of Bar & Restaurant.Mr.Debangshu Mondal, learned Advocate appearing for the Kolkata Municipal Corporation led by Mr. Ghosh submitted that under Section 425 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, the licence already issued to the writ petitioner should be deemed to have been issued provisionally which shall become final only after the other licences required under the Statute for the purpose of running the business of a Bar & Restaurant are produced and verified by the Municipal Authority. Considering the submissions made by the learned Advocates the writ petitioner is directed to produce all licences, which he has, according to him obtained, to the Municipal Commissioner for verification. In the event he finds that all requisite licences have already been obtained by the writ petitioner, he shall, in that even...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »