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.
Magma Fincorp Ltd. Vs. Dashrath Natu Kond and anr
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-25-2010
The Court: The report filed by the Receiver in Court today is taken on record. It is stated there that he could not take possession of the equipment, as it could not be sufficiently identified for want of chassis number and engine number on the body of the equipment. However the equipment was identified as the one which is the subject matter of the hire purchase agreement, by the representative of the petitioner. It is submitted in Court today by Ms. Sanyal, learned Advocate for the petitioner, that the above information has been erased by the respondents from the body of the equipment. Accordingly, I direct the Receiver to carry out the order dated 14th of July, 2010 on the basis of the identification made by the petitioner. I make this application returnable four weeks hence. The Receiver is to file a fresh report and will be paid a further 700 GMs. as ad hoc remuneration by the petitioner. The concerned Superintendent of police is directed to render all help to the Receiver, conside...
Union of India Vs. M/S. A.D. Chakraborty and Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-25-2010
This appeal is at the instance of the Union of India and is directed against an order dated 3rd July, 2009 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court by which the learned judge dismissed an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) filed by the present appellant for setting an Award published on 21st July, 2003 by the Arbitrator in connection with the dispute that had arisen between the parties in connection with the Contract No.42M/90-91 dated 14th February, 1990 for consideration of a Second Class Waiting Hall, Booking Office and other ancillary works at the Durgapur Station under the Divisional Engineer-II, Asansol, of the Eastern Railway. Pursuant to a tender-notice issued by the Eastern Railway, the respondent submitted his tender, which was accepted and consequently, a formal agreement was executed between the parties on 14th December, 1990. The total value of the contract was Rs.6,23,651.50p and in terms o...
Al Haj Amir Hasan Properties Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. the Land Acquisiti ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-25-2010
Objections filed on behalf of the respondent nos.1 to 3 and respondent no.4 filed in Court today be kept on record. Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parties. This is an application for consideration of additional ground on the reflection of the subsequent events happened during pendency of the appeal. The additional ground as sought for in paragraph 7 of the application reads such: 7. Your petitioners state and submit that in any event in view of non-issue of declaration under Section 6 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 within one year from 4th February, 2009, the acquisition proceedings in the present case have lapsed as provided under Section 6(ii) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and this point of law be taken as additional ground of appeal as follows: ADDITIONAL GROUND FOR THAT in any event in view of non-issue of declaration under Section 6 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 within one year from 4th February, 2009, the acquisition proceedings in the present case have lapsed a...
Nilratan Sarkar. Vs. Mr. Arun Kumar Deb ; Mr. Dipak Das, Advs.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-25-2010
In this writ petition the petitioner has challenged a show cause cum suspension order bearing Memo. No.702/SFS/SRP/10 dated 4th August, 2010 issued to the petitioner by the Sub Divisional Controller (Food and Supplies), Srirampore, Hooghly. The petitioner runs a Fair Price Shop under licence issued to him under the West Bengal Public Distribution System (Maintenance and Control) Order, 2003.The petitioner also carries on business as dealer of Super Kerosene Oil under licence issued under the West Bengal Kerosene Control Order, 1968. From the impugned order, it appears that on 22nd May, 2010 at about 11 a.m., while the petitioner was supplying ration commodities, he was arrested on the charge of an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and was released on bail on 11th June, 2010. In the mean while, on 24th May, 2010, while the petitioner was in custody, the Sub Divisional Controller passed an order tagging the ration cards tagged to the shop of the petitioner to a different...
indusind Bank Ltd. Vs. Samir Sharma and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-24-2010
The Court: Affidavit of service filed in Court be kept with the record. None appears for the respondents. The report of the Receiver filed in Court today is taken on record. It shows utter disregard by the officer in-charge Krishangunj, Police Station. I direct the concerned Superintendent of Police to forthwith ensure implementation of this order, otherwise contempt rule will be issued against all responsible. Let a copy of the report of the Receiver be forwarded by the Receiver to the Superintendent of Police. I make this application returnable on 6th of September, 2010 by when the order dated 27th of July, 2010 must be complied with. The Receiver may be paid a further ad hoc remuneration of 700 GMs. to be paid by the petitioner. Superintendent of Police and all parties concerned are to act on a signed photocopy of this order on the usual undertakings....
Magma Fincorp Ltd. Vs. Hemanta Kumar Roy and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-24-2010
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 arising of a hire purchase agreement, containing an arbitration clause. It is submitted by the petitioner that an award has already been passed on 26th April, 2010. Time to enforce the award has not yet arrived. This application is filed on the apprehension that in the meantime the respondents would transfer or part with possession of the subject matter of the agreement. Affidavit of service has been filed in Court. It is submitted that the respondents have been served, which submission is accepted. Therefore, on the above prima facie case, I pass an order in terms of prayers (a) and (b) of the petition. I appoint Mr. Biswanath Mitra, Bar Library Club, Advocate as Receiver at an initial remuneration of 700 GMs. to be paid by the petitioner. Receiver to file the report by the returnable date. The Receiver will be at liberty to appoint an agent bu...
Parmanand Agarwal and anr. Vs. Parmeshwar Das Agarwal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-24-2010
The Court : On being mentioned, the matter is taken up for hearing after treating the same as on days list by consent of the parties. Let there be an order in terms of prayer (a) of the application. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties on interim orders. We think in the given facts and circumstances it will not be proper for this Court to pass any interim order unless the appeal is finally heard. In so far as the proceedings before the Company Judge is concerned, that may proceed. We make it clear that any decision taken by the Company Judge being amenable to an appeal and in case any party is aggrieved and prefers an appeal, then this appeal can be heard along with company appeal by the same Bench so that there is no conflict in orders which will be required to be passed. We are prima facie of the view that no irreparable loss is likely to be suffered by any of the parties as the property, which is the subject matter of the suit, is within the family. Our attention has be...
Supriya Mondal Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-24-2010
The Court : Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. Upon perusing the instant application it appears that initially an order was passed by another learned Single Bench of this Court on 29th December, 2006. An appeal was preferred there from by the Director of School Education, Government of West Bengal, before the Honble Court of Appeal which was pleased to allow the appeal in terms of the following order dated 12th May, 2008:- Heard learned counsel for the appellants on the application for condo nation of delay. We are satisfied with the explanation given in the application for condo nation of delay. Accordingly the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. This appeal has been filed by the State challenging the order passed by the learned single Judge on 29th of December, 2006. We are informed that the order under appeal has been passed without taking into consideration the judgment of the Division Bench. It has also been submitted that the judgment passed in Writ Petition...
G.E. Money Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Tapas Sahu and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-24-2010
The Court : This is a Section 9 application by the mortgagee. Upon mortgage of the property mentioned in annexure B to the petition, the petitioner mortgagee advanced substantial sum of money to the respondent mortgagor. As of now there is Rs. 1 crore due and payable by the respondent mortgagor to the mortgagee. It is submitted that in the arbitration a money award would be claimed. It is also submitted that rights under the mortgage like foreclosure and sale are not contemplated. Therefore this Court should exercise jurisdiction. Considering the fact that over a crore is due and payable and the respondents were not appearing in spite of filing of affidavit of service, I direct the respondents to secure a sum of Rs. 1,11,46,809/-, which is due and payable as of now by furnishing a bank guarantee in favour of the petitioner which the petitioner will not encase till further orders within a week from service of a copy of this order. In default there will be an injunction restraining the ...
Dr.Lokenath Bhose Vs. Sm.Kalpana Bhose and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-24-2010
The Court : It is admitted by the parties that the alleged award is not traceable, in spite of due search. The parties have also signed a terms of settlement which are counter-signed by their respective Advocates on record. In the circumstances, I pass an order setting aside the alleged award made by Mr. J.K.Mukherjee, learned Arbitrator. I also discharge Receiver appointed in this application. Further, the terms of settlement dated 10th August, 2010, are taken on record. I pass an order in accordance with such terms. The remuneration of the Arbitrator may be agreed upon by the parties during the reference. Award Case No.84 of 1994, GA No.1339 of 2010 and GA No.2404 of 2006 are disposed of accordingly in accordance with the above terms of settlement. Receiver, learned Arbitrator and all parties concerned are to act on a signed photocopy of this order upon the usual undertakings....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »