Kolkata Court April 2011 Judgments
Rasika Impex Pvt. Ltd. Vs.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-29-2011
1. The third judgment-debtor is in the process of being cross examined. The seventh judgment-debtor has been cross examined. The second judgment-debtor was supposed to be cross examined, but it is submitted that he has been hospitalized. The judgment-debtor nos. 2 to 7 should be present when the matter is taken up next on May 6, 2011. The third and the seventh judgment-debtors appear to be completely tutored and, prima facie, the answers given to questions appear to be to deceive both the decree-holder and Court.2. The third judgment-debtor has said that there is a family electronics shop by the name of Danish Music Corner and a hotel by the name of Danish Hotel at Dharmatala Street. Mr. Ranjan Kali, Advocate, is appointed receiver for the purpose of immediately proceeding to seal the shop room by the name of Danish Music Corner and the hotel by the name of Danish Hotel at 7, Lenin Sarani, Calcutta 13. The receiver will make an inventory of all items in the shop room and will not permi...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Anjula Nagpal and ors Vs. M/S. Aba Builders Ltd. and ors
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-29-2011
1. This is an appeal from an order of the Company LawBoard dated 20th April, 2011. An application under Sections 397, 398 filed bythe appellant is pending before the Company Law Board.Pending decision in that application, the appellant filed an applicationbefore the Board being C. A. 122 of 2011 asking inter alia that the ExtraordinaryGeneral Meeting called on 2nd May, 2011, pursuant to the notice dated 31stMarch, 2011 be not held.2. I find from examination of the order of the Board that this particularissue has not been decided. The Board has held as follows: In furtherance of the order passed by this Bench on 24.03.2011,the petitioners are hereby allowed to take one practicing CompanySecretary, in addition to two practicing Chartered Accountants, totake the inspection of records of the company at its registeredoffice at Kolkata on and from 25.04.2011 to 30.04.2011 duringbusiness hours. List the matter on 10.06.2011 at 2.30 P.M.3. Therefore, the application was directed to be listed o...
Tag this Judgment!Mr. S. K. Kapoor Vs. Mr. S. N. Mookherjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-29-2011
1. This appeal is at the instance of a defendant in a suit for infringement oftrademark and passing off and is directed against order dated December 7, 2010passed by a learned Singled Judge of this Court by which His Lordship dismissedthe application filed by the appellant for stay of the suit as well as for deleting thepleadings relating to the allegation of passing off.Being dissatisfied, the defendant has come up with the present appeal.The respondent before us filed in this High Court a suit being C.S. No.10of 2009 praying for permanent injunction restraining the appellant before usand/or its servants, agents, dealers, retailers and others from infringing or in anymanner using or causing to be used and/or enabling others to infringe or use thetrademark PILOT and/or PILOT NUMBER ONE or any other deceptively similarmark or any trademark consisting of the word PILOT and/or PILOT NUMBERONE in respect of cigarettes or other tobacco products.2. After entering appearance in the suit, the ...
Tag this Judgment!Coal India Ltd Vs. Nicco Corporation Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-29-2011
1. The Court:- The appellant Coal India Limited has impugned the judgment and order of the Learned Trial Judge whereby and whereunder the Learned Trial judge has passed a conditional order of admitting winding up petition. The short fact of the case is that the respondent/petitioning creditor obtained an ex parte decree. On the strength of the said decree the application for winding up of the appellant company was filed. It is settled law that unsatisfied decree affords one of the grounds for presuming that company is unable to pay its debt. 2. The company filed affidavit-in-opposition stating that on coming to know of passing of the ex parte decree application for setting aside of the same was made before the Learned Civil Court who passed the decree. 3. The Learned Trial Judge notwithstanding recording the fact of making application for setting aside of the ex parte decree has passed the aforesaid order. The Learned Trial Judge is of the view that making an application before the Lea...
Tag this Judgment!Md NasiruddIn Sk Vs. the Union of India, Service Through the Secretary ...
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-29-2011
SadhanKumar Gupta, MEMBER (Judicial) Initially, the writ petition was filed before the Honble High Court at Calcutta. Thereafter, due to the advent of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, the said writ petition was transferred to this Bench by the order of the Ld. Single Judge of the High court and it was re-numbered as TA 77 of 2010. 2. The facts, as stated in the application, are that the applicant was enrolled in the military service on 18.2.2003. While he was under training, he was admitted to Military Hospital, Kamptee, Allahabad on 1.5.2003 for Acute and Transient Psychotic Disorder and from the said hospital he was transferred to Command Hospital at Pune for further treatment. From 6.5.2003 to 27.10.2003, the applicant was receiving treatment in the said hospital for his disease and ultimately, he was placed before the Medical Board, which was held at the said Command Hospital, Pune. As per recommendation of the Medical Board, he was released from military service on the ground ...
Tag this Judgment!Pravat Saha @ Pravat Kumar Saha Vs. Union of India Service Through the ...
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-26-2011
LT GEN K P D SAMANTA, MEMBER (ADMINISTRATIVE): 1. The petitioner, Pravat Kumar Saha, was enrolled in the Army Air Defence Corps of the Indian Army on 11 March 2005 and reported for training to Army Air Defence (AAD) centre at Nashik (Maharashtra). He was absent without leave on two occasions during training; once for eight days and second time for 83 days while undergoing advance training phase. He was summarily punished on each occasion by the Commanding Officer for the said offence under Section 39 (a) of the Army Act. In the process he was absent from advance training for 91 days. In accordance with a policy of the Army Headquarter, he was discharged from service on 4th March 2006 for being absent from training for more than 30 days consecutively. The petitioner represented against such discharge order before the higher authorities including a petition from his father to the Defence Minister, but such representations were rejected and the authorities maintained that the discharge wa...
Tag this Judgment!Prabhudatta Pattnaik Vs. Union of India Through the Secretary and Othe ...
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-26-2011
SadhanKumar Gupta, MEMBER (Judicial) 1. Initially, the writ petition was filed before the Honble Orissa High Court by the applicant. It was subsequently transferred to this Tribunal, as per provisions of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 and re-numbered as TA 194 of 2010. 2. The case of the applicant is that he entered into the military service on 7.3.87 and was discharging his duties with honesty, dignity and devotion. Due to the serious illness of the mother of the applicant, she was advised for operation and for that reason, the applicant came to his native place on 16.12.93 on leave. However, as the condition of his mother deteriorated, so, he could not join his duty in time. For that reason, the period for which he over-stayed, was treated as absence without leave. On 3.2.94, the applicant returned back to his place of posting, when he was directed to remain in military custody. A court of enquiry was held and thereafter, summary of evidence was recorded. On the basis of such su...
Tag this Judgment!Colgate Palmolive (India) Limited. Vs. Coastal Roadways Limited.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-25-2011
1. In this appeal the question arises whether after presentation of plaint the plaintiff lodged writ of summons within 14 days of presentation of plaint. From the report of the office of the Sheriff, Calcutta, which is annexed at page 21 of the application, we find that the copies of the plaint were lodged in the office of Sheriff on 28 th February, 1992 at 2.20 p.m. The returnable date of the writ of summons was fixed on 24 th March, 1992.2. It is further stated that after completion of procedural part, in order to make the writ of summons ready it was found that returnable date had expired. So the writ of summons could not be served upon the defendant due to shortage of time provided in the rule. Ultimately, 17 years thereafter the matter appeared in the warning list when the plaintiff allegedly came to know that the original writ of summons lodged was not actually served. 3. Before this Court it is strenuously contended by Mr. Chowdhury, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the d...
Tag this Judgment!Rakesh Kumar Ghosh Vs. Union of India Through the Ministry of Defence, ...
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-20-2011
LT GEN K P D SAMANTA, MEMBER (ADMINISTRATIVE): 1. The petitioner, Rakesh Kumar Ghosh was enrolled at ASC (Army Service Corps Centre, Gaya on 19 April 2002 after going through the due process of preliminary general medical examination as is done for all recruits. He was subjected to a second medical examination at Military Hospital, Gaya on 8th May 2002. There it was detected that he had a deformity diagnosed as, CubitusValgus-Bilateral, which, as per medical standards for enrolment, was a rejection criteria. He was referred to Command Hospital Lucknow, where he was declared unfit for ibid deformity that was labelled constitutional and beyond acceptable limit; thus discharged on medical grounds. Aggrieved with such decision that robbed him of his livelihood, he represented before the military authorities pleading for review, but not agreed by the authorities. He then approached the Honble Calcutta High Court by filing a writ petition (WP No. 19405 of 2003) that was later transferred to ...
Tag this Judgment!Nagendranath Mondal Vs. Union of India Service Through the Secretary M ...
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-19-2011
LT GEN K P D Samanta, Member (Administrative): 1. The petitioner, Ex-Sepoy, Nagendranath Mondal was enrolled in the RAJPUT REGIMENT of the Indian Army on 22nd October, 1969. He took part in 1971 war at the Western Theatre, where he was wounded with a bullet injury. The bullet was lodged in the left side of his chest. He was treated in a military hospital and finally retired on completion of his normal terms of engagement having completed 15 years of active service on 1st Nov, 1984. He was in receipt of his normal entitled service pension. While he was released from Army, his Release Medical Board awarded him disability pension @ 30% of his disablement on account of gunshot wound on left chest. Such disability pension of 30% was awarded for 2 years. These are the facts that have been mentioned in the writ petition, not contested in any manner by the respondents in their Affidavit-in-Opposition (in short the A/O). In fact, it has been further clarified by the respondents in ibid A/O that...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »