Kolkata Court August 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.
Duckbill Drugs Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Antarctica Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-11-2010
The Court : This application has been made by the company further to liberty to apply provided in the order dated 12th April, 2010. By that order, admission and advertisement of this winding up application was stayed on some terms. This application is for variation of those terms. Such variation is prayed for by the company stating that they have been unable to comply with the terms of the said order strictly. However, I am satisfied that the company is willing to discharge its obligations under the said order, if some accommodation is provided by the Court. Admittedly further to the said order a sum of Rs.9,30,000/- has been paid by the company as of date. Therefore, the balance due today according to the said order is to be worked out by the company. Such balance is to be liquidated in seven equal monthly installments commencing from September, 2010. Each monthly installment is to be paid by the 7th of the each month. If there is any remainder that remainder is to be added to the la...
Strescon Industries Ltd. Vs. Gemus Engineering Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-11-2010
The Court : Instead of taking up the stay petition first, by consent of the parties, we hear out the whole appeal since all the papers which have been used before the Hon'ble First Court have been placed before us along with the stay petition. We have heard the learned Advocates for the parties at length. This appeal is directed against an order passed by the Company Court on 14.5.2010. The facts of the case are that the claim in the petition for winding up is for goods sold and delivered by the petitioning creditor to the company. It further appears from the fact that the goods were supplied to the company in accordance with the specification and purchase order was placed for 40000 Pcs. of the inserts at Rs.55.00 per piece. The total value of the purchase order inclusive of all duties and VAT was Rs.26,61,401.60. It appears that the goods ought to have been inspected by RITES before supply was effected by the petitioning creditor to the company and RITES issued certificate in respect ...
The Commissoiner of Customs(Port) and anr. Vs. Ruia Cotex Ltd. and ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-10-2010
The Court : Learned Advocate for the respondents submits thatthe learned Sr. Counsel who will be leading him in the matter isengaged in another court and therefore prays for an adjournment.We are inclined to adjourn the matter for a period of two weeks.It is made clear that we will proceed to hear the appeal onthe next date. The interim order granted by this Court is extendedtill then.Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if appliedfor, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with allrequisite formalities....
Magma Fincorp Ltd. Vs. Atar Singh and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-10-2010
The Court : This is a Section 9 application. It arises out of a hire purchase agreement containing an arbitration clause. The subject matter of the hire purchase agreement are two equipments. An award has already been made and published by the Arbitrator on 13th May, 2010. The time to file execution application has not yet arrived. However, the petitioner apprehends that in the meantime the respondents will alienate or damage or encumber the equipments in question. On 3rd August, 2010, I had passed an order of injunction in terms of prayer (b) and made the application returnable today to enable the respondents to appear. The order of injunction is valid till today. Accordingly, considering the prima facie case, I extend the interim order till disposal of this application. 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, in the circumstances, I pass an order in ...
Adhunik Ispat Ltd. Vs. Astha Infrastructure Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-10-2010
THE COURT: There will be an order in terms of prayer (a) of the application. The present appeal has been preferred from an order dated 1st March, 2010 passed by the Hon'ble First Court when the Hon'ble First Court was pleased to pass an order, inter alia, to the following effect: Report filed by the Special Officer be kept on record. From a reading of the said report, it appears that except for the security personnel, no activity was found at the said premises. In fact, the said Special Officer was not allowed to enter the said premises. Accordingly, directions are given for filing affidavits. In such circumstances, the Hon'ble First Court gave direction to file affidavits and the matter was directed to appear in the list for final disposal. Being aggrieved by the said order, this appeal has been filed on the ground that the Hon'ble First Court should have directed the Special Officer to revisit the premises in question and to carry out the order dated 17th February, 2010. In these cir...
Hscl-sipl (Jv) Vs. National Highways Authority of India
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-10-2010
The Court : The averments made in the Section 9 application do not show that this Court has jurisdiction. However, it is very extraordinary that such point was not taken at the earliest stage. As a consequence interim orders have been passed whereby the respondent has been directed to keep the bank guarantee amount in a separate account. Although I have no option but to dismiss the application, but since affidavits have been filed in this matter and the rights of the parties have been altered because of the pendency of this application before this Court, the parties are directed to maintain status quo amongst themselves with regard to the contract for a period of four weeks from date to enable the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum. On expiry of such period of four weeks or upon the petitioner approaching the forum, whichever is earlier, this order will stand vacated. All parties concerned are to act on a signed photocopy of this order on the usual undertakings....
Re: Raman Dhiman Vs. Official Liquidator, High Court, Calcutta and ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-10-2010
The Court : This application concerns the Punjab property only. There is a dispute amongst the ex-directors of the company. One of them is the applicant before me. The dispute is, to whom is the Official Liquidator to deliver possession of that property. I find from the judgement and order dated 15th March, 2010 in CA No.51 of 2010, CA No.52 of 2010, CA No.683 of 2008, CP No.2 of 196 that on the payment of Rs.62,00,000/- by 31st March, 2010 the attachment of inter alia the Punjab property would stand vacated. It is common ground that Rs.62,00,000/- has been paid. The applicant before me makes two contentions : (i) Possession should be handed over to his client as he is the rightful owner (ii) he has paid the security charges which are substantial. These security charges should be reimbursed to him. I will take the second point first. As far as the security charges are concerned, they were included in the sum of Rs.62,00,000/- in the order dated 15th March, 2010. As that judgment and or...
Subimal Chakaraborty Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-10-2010
THE COURT : Learned counsel appearing for the respondents is directed to file an affidavit to be affirmed by Joint Director of Rationing in respect of the variation made in case of the appellant-writ petitioner by reducing the number of ration cards and allocating the same to the other fair price shop people specifying both categories of APL and BPL cards. In the said affidavit, the respondent-authorities shall specify the maximum and minimum number of cards which can be assigned to a fair price shop in Calcutta Municipal Corporation area and also assert whether the Circular being No.1478 FS FS/SECTT/Food/6F5/05Pt. I is applicable to the Calcutta Municipal Corporation area or not. Such affidavit is to be filed by the respondents within a weeks time from date. The written instructions submitted by Mr. Das in Court today be kept with the records. Let the matter appear in the list on 17th August, 2010. Certified photostat copy of this order be made available to the parties upon compliance...
Magma Fincorp Ltd. Vs. Dharamender Yadev and anr..
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-10-2010
The Court :-This is a section 9 application. It is founded on a hire purchase agreement dated 19th December, 2007 between the parties. The subject matter of the agreement is an excavator, whose value is Rs.48,35,705/-. Due to default in payment of installments by the respondents, the petitioner terminated the agreement on 22nd February, 2010. The dues of the respondents towards the petitioner are Rs.17,67,736/-. Arbitrator has been appointed. This application was moved on 3rd August, 2010 when I passed a limited order of injunction and made the application returnable to enable the respondent to appear. 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 Chabi Bhattacharya, Advocate, Bar Association Room No. 2 as Receiver at an initial remuneration of 700 Gms. to...
Hscl-sipl (Jv) Vs. National Highways Authority of India
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-10-2010
The Court : The averments made in the Section 9 application do not show that this Court has jurisdiction. However, it is very extraordinary that such point was not taken at the earliest stage. As a consequence interim orders have been passed whereby the respondent has been directed to keep the bank guarantee amount in a separate account. Although I have no option but to dismiss the application, but since affidavits have been filed in this matter and the rights of the parties have been altered because of the pendency of this application before this Court, the parties are directed to maintain status quo amongst themselves with regard to the contract for a period of four weeks from date to enable the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum. On expiry of such period of four weeks or upon the petitioner approaching the forum, whichever is earlier, this order will stand vacated. All parties concerned are to act on a signed photocopy of this order on the usual undertakings....
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »