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.
Srei Equipment Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mother India Logistics and Minera ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-23-2010
The Court: Further to the order dated 13th March 2009 passed by Sister Indira Banerjee, J. in the above application the Receiver has taken possession of 6 equipments out of 12 mentioned in that order. Further, I have perused the affidavit of service, which tends to say that the respondents are either not available in the place of business or do not carry on business there. The postal documents bear the endorsement left. Moreover, more than three months have elapsed since the Receiver has visited the location of the equipments and nobody has come to claim them. The Receiver will take possession of the other six equipments forthwith and include the same in the report mentioned below. It is submitted that arbitration proceedings have progressed. An award has already been made. Therefore, I dispose of this application by directing the Receiver to sell the six equipments taken possession of by him at the best available price, by giving another notice to the respondents. The sale price shoul...
Paltu Mukherjee Vs. Dr.Pranab Dasgupta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-23-2010
The Court : By this contempt application the petitioner has alleged violation of order dated 22nd April, 2010 as modified on 4th May, 2010 and the order dated 19th July, 2010 as clarified on 29th July, 2010. The case of the petitioner is that pursuant to order dated 22nd April, 2010 and modified on 4th May, 2010 a notice was published on 22nd May, 2010 for preparation of a provisional photo electoral roll. Claims and objections were also invited providing a fortnights time. C.C.106 of 2010 was filed as there had been violation of the orders by no publishing the names of 205 members whose photographs did not appear at any point of time in the records of the respondent club. Therefore, by order dated 19th July, 2010 as clarified on 29th July, 2010 the respondent club was directed to publish notice in respect of 205 members within one week and follow the procedures laid down under Rule 38(a) of the Club Rules. Pursuant to such order on 21st July, 2010 a notice was issued calling for photo...
Srei Equipment Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mehta Transport Co. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-23-2010
The Court: According to the petitioner, their dues are about Rs.26 lacs as of today. This due according to them is on account of unpaid installments only. Mr. Tiwari for the hirer does not dispute a sum of Rs.10 lacs, but disputes the rest. The hire purchase agreement has life up to January, 2012. Therefore, even on the case admitted by Mr. Tiwari, up to January 2012 installments will keep falling due. Therefore, I dispose of this application and vacate the order dated 14th July, 2010 by the following conditional order:- a) The respondents or any of them will pay Rs.10 lacs to the petitioner within a week. b) A further sum of Rs.10 lacs will be paid by them by 31st of October, 2010. c) The Arbitral reference may proceed. In default of any condition the petitioner will be at liberty to mention this application for vacation of this order, for revival of the order dated 14th July, 2010 and for passing of an order for the Receiver to take physical possession of the trucks. The injunction w...
Eastern Fibres Industries Ltd. Vs. Laxminarayan Tapuria
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-23-2010
The Court : Instead of taking up the stay application, by consent of parties, we take up the appeal since all the papers which have been used before the Hon'ble First Court have been filed before us. This appeal is directed against the order dated 14th May, 2010. It appears that the claim of the petitioning creditor arises out of the professional charges for representing the company before the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction. The bills relate to his professional fees and the company on demand did not pay the amount. Accordingly, statutory notice was served under section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 on September 29, 2008. The company did not respond to the said statutory notice. Hence, a windingup petition had been filed. After hearing the parties, the Hon'ble Company Court directed after giving an adjustment of Rs.15,000/-, which was admitted by the petitioning creditor before the Hon'ble Company Court, admitted the winding-up petition in respect of th...
State of West Bengal and ors. Vs. Nitiah Saha and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-23-2010
The Court : After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties, and perusing the application for condo nation of delay, we are satisfied with the grounds stated in the petition. Accordingly, the delay of 14 days is condoned and the application for condonation of delay is allowed and is thus disposed of. The present appeal is directed against the order dated 11th June, 2010 passed by the Hon'ble First Court. It appears in this matter the Hon'ble First Court on 4th March, 2005 on a writ petition (being W.P.No.214 of 2005) moved by the writ petitioners passed an order, whereby His Lordship was pleased to grant liberty to State Transport Authority to issue the necessary permit in fvour of the writ petitioners in W.P.No. 214 of 2005 on the route Barasat to Garia. It is further directed that the vehicles of the petitioners (W.P.No. 214 of 2005) in plying and/or in operating on the above routes shall not touch any part of the Eastern Metropolitan Bye-Pass on the basis of the permits ...
Jainind Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-2010
The Court : Learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner submits that she may be permitted to withdraw the writ petition to enable her client to prefer an appeal under Section 31 of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 against the impugned order and in the meantime the Court may continue with the statement made by the petitioner on 16th July, 2010, that is, the petitioner will not start the unit without permission of this Court, which was accepted as an undertaking and this Court further directs the parties to preserve status quo till the next date of hearing, which has been extended from time to time. We, therefore, permit the petitioner to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to file appeal under Section 31 of the said Act. It is made clear that if the petitioner prefers an appeal within two weeks from the date of passing of the order, till then the respondents would not take any action against the petitioner subject to the petitioner maintaining status q...
Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage and anr. Vs.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-2010
The Court : Heard learned Counsel for the parties. In the affidavit-in-opposition filed on behalf of the respondent Corporation on 29th July, 2010, it has been mentioned that, The West Bengal Heritage Commission held its 31st Meeting on 8th July, 2010 in Agenda No.IV of the said Meeting the Commission duly considered all the 33 Nos. of Resolution after thorough discussion and finally it was resolved to accept 32 Nos. of Resolution and the Resolution relating to 5A, Russel Street, Kolkata has been referred back to the Kolkata Municipal Corporation for review. In view of the said Resolution of the Commission, the Resolution of the Heritage Conservation Committee on the issue of delisting of the said premises from the list of Heritage Building is required to be reviewed for taking fresh decision (emphasis is ours). Therefore, it is submitted that the Heritage Conservation Committee would proceed to review the decision in respect of the resolution relating to 5A, Russel Street, Kolkata de...
Ashim Kumar Ganguly and anr. Vs. Union of India
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-2010
THE COURT : Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to a news item obtained from the website of Times of India, EG Image and the news report is through Times News Network. A copy of the same is tendered which is taken on record and marked X for identification. The first two paragraphs of the said news item reads as under : Pune : City-based World Peace Centre (WPC) will bring the ashes of freedom fighter and Azaad Hind Sena founder Subhas Chandra Bose, who sought Japans assistance for Indias freedom movement during World War II, to Pune by the next Independence Day. The centre has received clearance from the Union Government through Indo- Japan association and the ashes that are currently in Tokyos Netaji Subhas Chandra Memorial will be handed over to the WPC by the next Independence Day. . . .Learned counsel submits that he will place this news item on record along with an affidavit to be filed on behalf of the petitioner and copy of the same would be furnished to t...
Ashoke Goenka and anr. Vs. Sri Alapan Bandypadhyay and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-2010
The Hon'ble JUSTICE JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA Date : 20th August, 2010. The Court : This application for contempt was filed by the petitioners by alleging non-compliance of the direction passed by this Court in the order dated December 24, 2008 in W.P. No.1358 of 2008. By the said order, the municipal authority was directed to sanction the building plan submitted by the petitioners within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of the said order by imposing any suitable restriction, if at all found necessary, as per rule 16(4) of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Building Rules, 1990 subject, however, to compliance of certain recommendations, of the Municipal Building Committee as mentioned in the said order, by the petitioners. Since the building plan submitted by the petitioners was not sanctioned by the municipal authority in terms of the direction passed by this Court in the aforesaid order, the petitioners filed the instant application for contempt. Mr. Chatterjee, lea...
Singhal Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Parmanand Agarwal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-20-2010
The Court: Two applicants have filed this application. Their alleged locus standi is disclosed in paragraph 13 of the affidavit. The prayer in the Judges Summons is as follows: Stay of C.P. No.384 of 2007 connected with C.A. No.785 of 2007 and all proceedings connected and/or connected therewith till disposal of the appeal and C.S. No.47 of 2008. I reproduce the order dated 18th August, 2010, I had passed when I was requested to adjourn the main matter: Prayer for adjournment is made by Mr. Chatterjee on the ground that his clients appeal and stay application are awaiting consideration before the Honble Appeal Court. However, till date there is no stay. This application is for enforcement of a Scheme of demerger. It appears that a family settlement on which such Scheme rests is under challenge in CS No.47 of 2008. A judgement and order dated 3rd August, 2010 was passed in an interim application in that suit where the family settlement has not been disturbed. An appeal from that order i...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »