Court : Kolkata
This is an appeal under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956. The order that is challenged is interlocutory. It was made on 14th September 2009. By that order the appointed auditors were removed. Two firms, M/s. K.K. Chapparia & Associates and S.K. Agarwal & Co. were appointed joint auditors in their place. On this little point, the appeal has been argued for several days. The first point is regarding maintainability. It is said that no appeal under Section 10F is maintainable as no question of law arises from the said order. This point has to be gone into before proceeding further with the appeal on merits. An appeal under the Income Tax Act, 1922, went up to the Supreme Court. The language of the said Act was identical, to section 10F, namely, that an appeal lay from any question of law arising out of such order. When does a question of law arise from the order? In that case, Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay v Scindia Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. reported in AIR 1961 SC 1633, the Su...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
The Court : By this contempt application the petitioner alleges violation of orders dated 29th March, 2010 and 21st May, 2010. The case of the petitioner is that by order dated 29th March, 2010 an order of injunction was passed restraining the respondent no.2 from proceeding with C.P. 113(ND) of 2009 pending before the Principal Bench, Company Law Board, New Delhi. By subsequent order dated 21st May, 2010 the respondent no.2 was entitled to contest C.A.631 of 2009 pending before the Company Law Board. The said orders have been misconstrued by the alleged contemnor/respondent and the aforesaid has been noted in the letter dated 14th June, 2010. In spite of the hearing of C. P. 113(ND) of 2009 being restrained and the parties being given liberty to only proceed with the hearing of C. A.631 of 2009 an application has been filed in July, 2010 whereby the alleged contemnor/respondent sought to place on record certain documents in not only C.A.631 of 2009 but also in the proceedings under Se...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
The Court :-The report filed by the Receiver today in Court is taken on record. Pursuant to the order dated 10th August, 2010, payments have been made by the petitioner and the Receiver has delivered possession of the vehicle to the hirer. Therefore, this application being G. A. No.2386 of 2010 is disposed of with the order that the hirer will continue to enjoy possession of the vehicle, if he pays the installment amount which has fallen due in August, 2010 and the future installments, each of which is Rs.84,800/=. In default, the petitioner will have at liberty to apply before the Court for the Receiver to take actual physical possession, according to the order of this Court in A.P.No.183 of 2010. I record that by such order there is an injunction restraining the respondents from transferring or parting with possession of the vehicle as submitted. Receiver will be paid further remuneration of 700 GMs to be shared equally by the parties. Receiver and all parties concerned are to act on...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
The Court :-This is an application for termination of the mandate of the Arbitrator. Initially I was inclined to pass direction for filing of affidavits and staying the hands of the Arbitrator till this application was disposed of, particularly, when, not even the statement of claim has been filed before him as submitted. But the respondents oppose this prayer. At this point of time it is not possible for the Court to go into the facts to ascertain whether the Arbitrators mandate has been terminated, what steps the Arbitrator has taken, whether the statement of claim has been filed or any further steps have been taken, and so on. Therefore, let affidavit in opposition is to be filed by 20th September, 2010. List this application on 28th September, 2010. Affidavit in reply may be filed in the meantime. The arbitration proceeding may continue, subject to the result of this application. All questions are kept open. All parties concerned are to act on a signed photocopy of this order on th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
The Court : I have much appreciated the stand of the respondent company in this winding up application. Their Counsel was fair enough to submit that they do not have any defence to the claim. As such their Counsel only prayed for time to pay off all the dues of the petitioning creditor. This plea of the respondent company is reasonably considered in this judgement and order as will appear below. The claim of the petitioning creditor arises out of unpaid price of switchgears sold and delivered by them to the respondent company between 24th June, 2008 and 14th August, 2008. The price claimed is Rs.12,14,794/-. The interest claimed is @ 18% per annum. Simple or compound is not mentioned in the claim. As the principal sum is admitted in Court, I do not have to narrate any further reasons as to how this sum has become payable. On such admission, I hold that the petitioning creditor is prima facie entitled to this principal sum of Rs.12,14,794/-. Further, I prima facie award interest @ 7% pe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
In this writ application the petitioner has sought orders directing the concerned respondents to issue a formal letter offering permit to the petitioner in the route Haldia to Puri, in terms of his application. It is pleaded that the application of the petitioner for permit was considered by the State Transport Authority, West Bengal and a decision was taken to grant permit to the petitioner. The aforesaid decision was taken at the meeting of the State Transport Authority, West Bengal, held on 29th October, 2008. Thereafter, a letter being no.813/STA/7E49/09 dated 11th February, 2009 was issued to the petitioner calling upon the petitioner to collect the offer letter for grant of permit. The petitioner has alleged on oath that the petitioner, on receiving the said letter dated 11th February, 2009, went to the office of the concerned respondents and met the dealing assistant and was told that the offer letter was not ready. According to the petitioner, the petitioner has, from time to t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
The Court : The application being GA No.2776 of 2010 has been taken out challenging Memo No.1578 (88) dated August 16, 2010 issued by the Sub-Divisional Controller( F & S), Siliguri, which is hereinafter referred to as the impugned order. The impugned order is extracted herein below for convenience: To continue supply of ration commodities to the non workers & non eligible dependents Ration Card holders residing in Tea Garden areas, it is advised vide DCF&S;, Darjeeling memo no.1576 dt. 11.8.10 to engage willing MR dealers of Panchayat areas, one for each TG/distribution centre, having ready infrastructure thereon, this will be a temporary, stop gap arrangement due to pending appointment of FPS dealers for them. If you are willing to run distribution centre as above, you may submit option in prescribed proforma by 23rd August 2010. There is a subsequent letter being Memo No.1661/1(4) dated August 24, 2010 from the District Controller, F & S, Darjeeling at Siliguri to the Sub divisiona...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
The Court :-The petitioners in this art.226 petition dated August 12, 2010 are alleging that the application for alteration of memorandum and regulations dated December 4, 2009 (at p. 46) has not been considered by the Registrar of Firms, Societies and Non Trading Corporation, West Bengal. It has been stated that the application was made in terms of the provisions of the West Bengal Societies Registration Act, 1961. Mr. Kar, counsel for the petitioners, has argued that once the application was filed, the Registrar incurred an obligation to decide according to provisions of the Act and the Rules framed there under. Mr. Bose, appears for a person, who has filed an application for addition of party. He submits that suppressing material facts the petitioners have brought this petition for an order directing the Registrar to decide the application that was filed without any legal basis. Mr. Dhar, appears for the State and submits that if the Registrar is directed to give his decision in the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
The Court: After hearing the submissions of Mr. Partha Sarathi Bose learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiff and Mr. Debnath Ghosh, learned counsel appearing in support of the application for extension of time to file written statement of the sixth defendant, HDFC Bank Limited and after considering the merits of such application, the sixth defendant is permitted to file the written statement by Friday next i.e. 3 September 2010. The time to file written statement is to be regarded as peremptory. Having regard to the submissions of Mr. Ghosh, leave is granted to the sixth defendant to enter appearance positively by tomorrow and inform the learned Advocate-on-record of the plaintiff. The sixth defendant will, however, pay cost to the plaintiff assessed at Rs.5000/- and the cost should be paid before filing of the written statement either to the learned Advocate-onrecord of the plaintiff or to the plaintiff directly. If the cost is not paid, the department will not acce...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Going through the report submitted by the Director, Finger Print Bureau, CID, West Bengal, we are satisfied that the appellant petitioner appeared before the Apex Medical Board on 5th October, 1993 for the purpose of assessment of his correct age. The Competent Authority of the Eastern Coalfields Limited considering the service records including the age assessed by the Apex Medical Board asked the petitioner to retire from service w.e.f. 30th April, 2006 in view of attaining the age of superannuation i.e. 60 years on 5th April, 2006. The appellant herein questioned the correctness of the age mentioned in the service records of the respondent-Coal Company. Having heard the learned Advocate for the respective parties and considering the report of the Apex Medical Board, we are satisfied that the concerned authority of the respondent-Coal Company has rightly directed the appellant to retire from service w.e.f. 30th April, 2006 on attaining the age of superannuation and we find no irregula...
Tag this Judgment!