Kolkata Court January 2011 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.
Sri Shiba Brata Kabiraj Vs. Sri Sujit Kumar Nandy
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Jan-21-2011
1. This Second Appeal is directed against judgment and decree dated 31st July, 2000 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) in Title Appeal No.1 of 1997. By said impugned judgment and decree learned Lower Appellate Court set aside judgment and decree dated 31st July, 1996 passed by learned Munsif, Additional Court, Sealdah in Title Suit No.107 of 1983.2. The respondent plaintiffs case, in short, is that defendant Shiba Brata Kabiraj was a tenant under him in the ground floor of premises No.3/B Shyamlal Street in respect of one room partitioned into two rooms and common latrine at a rental of Rs.110/- per month according to English Calendar month. The defendant defaulted in payment of rent since January, 1975. Defendant along with his youngest brother started to occupy the suit premises initially. Later on another brother came to reside there and thereafter they inducted some other persons as boarders for running a mess in the suit premises. The defendant converted mode of user ...
Barid Baran Laha and ors. Vs. Manjuri Ghoshal (Claiming as Laha)
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Jan-21-2011
1. This Second Appeal is directed against judgment and decree dated 29th August, 2008 and 5th September, 2008 respectively passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 3rd Court at Howrah in Title Appeal No. 14 of 2008 thereby reversing the judgment and decree dated 13th December, 2007 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 7th Court at Howrah in Title Suit No.38 of 2003.2. The appellant/plaintiffs case, in short, is that the suit property was purchased property of one Pijush Kanti Laha. He died on 8.10.94 leaving behind his father Balai Chandra Laha as his sole legal heir. After his death Balai Chandra Laha became the owner of the property and continued to possess the same. Balai Chandra Laha died on 13.12.95 leaving behind the present plaintiffs as his legal heirs. Since then present plaintiffs are in possession of the suit property and are realizing rent from the tenant.3. Balai Chandra Laha during his life time filed a suit being Title Suit No.7 of 1995 in the Court o...
Urban Amenities Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mrityunjoy Seal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-2011
1. This appeal is at the instance of a third party in a proceeding for eviction of a tenant whose tenancy is governed by the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act and is directed against the judgment and decree dated 4th August, 2010, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court by which His Lordship decreed the suit for eviction ex parte against the tenant. 2. Being dissatisfied, the appellant has come up with this appeal with a prayer for permission to file such appeal as a third party to the decree. It appears from record that the suit out of which the present appeal has been filed was instituted by the respondent Nos.1 to 3 against the respondent No.4 alleging forfeiture of the lease by treating the respondent No.4 as a tenant governed by the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act. None appeared on behalf of the respondent No.4 and the learned Single Judge on the basis of ex parte evidence was satisfied that the plaintiffs proved the ground alleged in the plaint and cons...
Steel (Singapore) Trading Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-2011
1. This appeal is directed against an order dated 13th May 2010, whereby His Lordship was pleased to hold that Section 42 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) would not apply to either Section 11 or Section 8 contained in Part 1 of the said Act.2. The facts of the case briefly are as follows:- The appellant entered into a contract with the respondent whereby the respondent sold to the Claimant 500 MT of Cold Rolled Galvanized Plain Sheets @ USD 1085.00 per MT on the terms and conditions contained in the said agreement. The material was to be shifted latest of 28th February 2007. The claimant was required to open a confirmed irrevocable Letter of Credit towards price of 250 MT and the balance 250 MT was to supply by the respondent against 10% advance and 90% against documents. The appellant/plaintiff opened the Letter of Credit and paid the advance to the respondent on 23rd February 2007. The respondent in spite of repeated requests faile...
indoworth India Ltd. Vs. Icici Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-2011
1. The above application made on notice of Motion dated 3rd September, 2008 is taken out by Asset Reconstruction Company (India) limited the defendant No.3 herein praying for following reliefs:-(a) Leave be granted to the petitioner to serve a copy of this petition to the Indoworth (Thailand) Ltd. having its registered office at 75/101, 102 Ocean Tower, 2, 37th Floor, SOI Sukhumvit 19 (Wattana), Ashoke Road, Klongtoey Nuev, Wattana, Bangkok 10110,(b) Declare that the contract for sale referred to in the petition stands rescinded. Alternatively an order be made rescinding the contract for sale of the immovable property of the Defendant No.2.(c) Order be passed directing the plaintiff to restore possession of the saidimmovable property of the Defendant No.2 to the petitioner within 7days from the date of the order to be passed herein or within suchperiod as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper,(d) Order be passed directing the plaintiff to pay to the petitioner all the profits which...
Kwality Ice Creams (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-2011
1. The above appeal has been admitted against the judgment and order dated 15th October, 2001 passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in relation to assessment year of 1996-97. It was admitted by this Court by an order dated 31st July 2002 on the following substantial question of law:-(i) Whether the amount received by the appellant for transfer of its entire marketing undertaking by way of slump sale in terms of the agreement was a capital receipt to which the provisions of Section 50(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 had no application and no capital gains could be assessed and the purported findings of the Tribunal rejecting the said contention of the appellant have been arrived at by ignoring the relevant materials and/or by taking into consideration irrelevant and/or extraneous materials and/or is otherwise arbitrary, unreasonable and perverse?(ii) In the event of it being held that there was any liability to tax in respect of transfer of the marketing undertaking, whethe...
Sushanta Roy. Vs. Shyamal Kanti Bandopadhyay and anr.
Court: Kolkata Appellate
Decided on: Jan-21-2011
1. Challenge is to the order dated December 17, 2009 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), First Court, Sealdah in Title Suit No.259 of 2007 thereby allowing an application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by the defendant no.1. By the said order, the plaintiff was directed to restore the possession of the A schedule property to the defendant no.1.2. The plaintiff / petitioner herein instituted a suit being the Title Suit No.259 of 2007 for permanent injunction praying for a decree for restraining the defendant no.1 from dispossessing and / or disturbing the peaceful physical possession of the plaintiff in the A schedule property, as described in the schedule to the plaint. At the time of filing the suit, the petitioner prayed for temporary injunction. He also prayed for ad interim injunction which was refused by the learned Trial Judge. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred a misc. appeal being Misc. Appeal No.88 of 2007 and the lower appellate Cour...
Hindustan Steel Works and Construction Ltd. Vs. M/S. P. Sethian
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-2011
1. This appeal is directed against an order passed by the Hon'ble First Court on 1st April, 2010 in A.P. No. 164 of 2008 whereby the learned Trial Court was pleased to dismiss the application for setting aside of an award published by the leaned Arbitrator on 31st December, 2007. 2. The disputes between the parties relate to a work/contract dated 27th June, 1982 for construction of two school buildings and one block of flats at Beida District Libya. The value of the contract was for an aggregate sum of 3,171,53.66 Libyan Dinars (hereinafter referred to as LD). It is admitted by the respondent that an amount of Rs.4,87,723.00 LD has already been paid by the appellant to the respondent in respect of the said contract. 3. The facts of the case briefly are as follows: A suit was filed in 1985 by the appellant for recovery of interest bearing loans from the respondent. The said suit was stayed by the Court on an application filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, on the ground ...
Gulf (Oil) Corporation Limited Vs. Steel Authority of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-2011
1. This instant appeal is preferred against a judgment and/or order dated 29th October, 2009 in A.P. No. 252 of 2007 passed by the Hon'ble First Court. 2. An application was filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) for setting aside of an arbitral award dated 7th May, 2007 passed by the Learned Arbitrator. 3. After filing affidavits by the parties before the Court, the matter was finally disposed of on 29th October, 2009 by the Hon'ble First Court. 4. His Lordship was pleased to set aside the award and held as follows :- The learned Arbitrator, in my view, committed a patent error in recording a finding contrary to the judicial finding of the Chief Justice of there being a concluded contract. The impugned award cannot be sustained and the same is thus set aside. 5. Being aggrieved, this appeal has been filed by the appellant. 6. The facts of the case briefly are as follows:- 7. The appellant Gulf (Oil) Corporation Li...
West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited Vs. Jadavpu ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-2011
1. This appeal is directed against an order passed by the Honble Single Judge dated 8th February 2010 on a writ application filed by the Jadavpur Tea Company Limited & Ors challenging the order of the appellate authority dated 13th January 2009. By the said order dated 13th January 2009, final order of assessment dated 10th November 2008 was affirmed. 2. By the said final order of assessment the respondent/writ petitioner was required to pay Rs.9,38,045/-. 3. The writ petitioner in the writ petition challenged the entire proceedings from the stage of provisional assessment including the appellate authoritys order. 4. The Honble Single Judge held that the purported order of the appellate authority suffers from errors on the face of it. The Honble Single Judge allowed the writ petition in favour of the writ petitioner. His Lordship further directed to reconsider the assessment made by the Assessing Officer in accordance with law within a period of 12 weeks from the date of communication ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »