Kolkata Court January 2012 Judgments
Lourdes Textiles Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Pam Infrastructure Projects Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-25-2012
GA No.137 OF 201.WITH APOT 59 of 2011 AP 34.of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE LOURDES TEXTILES PVT.LTD.Versus PAM INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI Date :25. h January, 2012. The Court :- We have seen the impugned judgment and order and heard the learned Counsel for the parties, we are of the view that this is not appealable order for the following reasons ;Admittedly the application, before the learned Trial Judge, under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 was filed. The learned Trial Judge has been pleased to allow the application and found that there has been existence of the arbitration agreement and the same also covers the disputes canvassed before His Lordship. Hence, His Lordship has been pleased to refer the matter to the Honble The Chief Justice for appointment of arbitrator. This order is not an appealable as provided under Section...
Tag this Judgment!Emami Biotech Ltd and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-25-2012
CC No.6 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE In the matter of: CHANCHAL MAL BACHOWAT, ARISING OUT OF WP No.980 of 2011 EMAMI BIOTECH LTD & ANR. Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE JAYANTA KUMAR BISWAS Date :25. h January, 2012. Appearance: Mr.Samaridytya Pal Senior Advocate. Ms.Vineeta Meheria, Advocate. Mr.Pratik Prokash Banerjee, Advocate. The Court: Mr.Banerjee appearing for the contemner and also for the respondents in the pending WP submits as follows. Though the suo motu contempt rule has not yet been served, the contemner getting information has come to appear in person and he is present in Court. He is no longer in the office of the Finance Secretary of the State Government and today he is not in a position to comply with the order. The contemner needs time to file an affidavit stating the reasons for non-compliance with the order of this Court. Mr.Banerjee has also submitted that the State unable to pay the pe...
Tag this Judgment!Debjit Sarkar and ors. Vs. Pratima Sarkar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-25-2012
AP No.21 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE DEBJIT SARKAR & ORS.-VersusPRATIMA SARKAR Appearance: Mr.Ayan Kumar Boral, Adv...For the petitioneRs.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : January 25, 2012. The Court : Despite the respondent not being represented after service, the present request under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is clearly not maintainable. The petitioners cite the arbitration clause contained in a development agreement of July 5, 2000. The clause reads as follows: If at any time and (Sic, any) dispute shall arise between the parties hereto regarding the construction or interpretation of any of the terms and conditions herein contained or touching these presents or determination of any liability of any of the parties under this agreement, the same shall be referred to the arbitration, incase the parties agree to the case, otherwise to two-arbitrators one to be appointed by each ...
Tag this Judgment!..….Plaintiff Vs. Lee Harris Pomeroy Architectspc
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-25-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction G.A.No.2298 of 2011 Civil Suit No.80 of 2011 In the Goods of: SUSTAINABLE EMS LLC ...Plaintiff Vs LEE HARRIS POMEROY ARCHITECTS (LHPA) & ORS PC ...Defendants For the Defendant No.1/ Petitioner : Mr.Ranjan Bachawat with Mr.S.Sengupta and Mr.Rakesh Dev, AdvocatesDev, ocates For the Plaintiff/Respondent : Mr.Joyak Gupta with Mr.P.Halder, Advocates Heard on :18. 01.2012 Judgment on :25. h January, 2012 I.P.MUKERJI, J. This is an application by the fiRs.defendant. They are an American Company, having their head office in Broadway, New York. They want dismissal of the suit filed by the plaintiff, also an American Company, having their head office in Jersey City, New Jersey. Reliefs are claimed only against the fiRs.defendant. The second defendant did not appear at the hearing of this application. The third is a proforma defendant. The sum claimed in the plaint is Rs.1,69,75,485/- together with interest @ 18% per annum. Whethe...
Tag this Judgment!Sukumar Bhattacharyya Vs. Pran Kumar Bhattacharyya and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-25-2012
GA No.2719 of 2009 CS No.3 of 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF:SUKUMAR BHATTACHARYYA Versus PRAN KUMAR BHATTACHARYYA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date :25. h January, 2012. Appearance:Mr.Amitava Das, Advocate with Mr.P.C.Paul Chowdhury, Advocate..for plaintiff. Mr.U.P.Mukherjee, Advocate with Mr.J.Mondal, Advocate..for Defendant No.2(a) to 2(c).Mr.C.K.Saha, Advocate, Mr.Subrata Bhattacharyya, Advocate with Mr.S.Maiti, Advocate..for defendant no.1. The Court:-This is an application by the plaintiff in a Partition and Administration Suit. He seeks enforcement of a consent decree of partition, which was passed by this Court on 19th December, 2007 according to a Terms of Settlement duly signed by the parties and their Advocates-on-record. By parties I mean co-owners of the properties, which were the subject matter of the consent decree. By this consent decree each of the properties was divided into three ...
Tag this Judgment!Pradip Kumar Mahanto Vs. State of West Bengal and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-25-2012
APOT No.90 of 2011 With GA No.714 of 2011 WP No.171 of 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction PRADIP KUMAR MAHANTO Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS BEFORE The Honble Justice BANERJEE AND The Honble Justice SHUKLA KABIR (SINHA) Date :25. h January, 2012 Mr.Shamsul Arefin for the appellant. Mr.Sadhan Roy Chowdhury, Mr.Sirsanya Bandopadhyay for the State respondent. The Court : The writ petitioner/appellant applied for the post of Assistant Teacher in geography. School Service Commission prepared a merit list where the writ petitioner/appellant ranked 109. His serial number was 215 in the panel published on December 30, 2000. The panel remained valid till December 30, 2001. It could at best be extended for three years and that period expired in December, 2004. The writ petitioner/appellant approached the learned Single Judge on January 31, 2005 long after expiry of the panel. The writ petitioner/appellant approached the learned Single Judge with the grievanc...
Tag this Judgment!Natabar Dutta Prorperties P. Ltd. Vs. Official Liquidator
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-20-2012
CA No.61 of 2012 CP No. 91 of 1973 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction IN THE MATTER OF : NATABAR DUTTA PRORPERTIES P. LTD. (IN LIQN.) -VS- OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR BEFORE:The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEEDate : 20th January, 2012. Appearance : Mr.Amit Gupta, Adv., Mr.Mrinal Kanti Biswas, Adv., for Satsang. Mr.Rajesh Upadhyay, Adv., for Sitaram Shaw. Mr.Saumen Datta, Adv., Ms.Iti Dutta, Adv., Ms.Preetu Jain, Adv., for Ashim Kumar Dutta. Mr.Swapan Das, Adv., for Atanu Dutta. Mr.Debasish Ghosh, Adv., for Amit Kumar Dutta. Ms.Rama Dutta, Adv., 2 Mr.Achintya Kumar Dutta, Adv., Ms.Rajashree Dutta, Adv.,Mr.Arnab Dutta, Adv., for Cookme Spice Pvt. Ltd. Mr.S.Guhathakurata, Adv., for Indranil Dutta. Mrs.Ruma Sikhdar, Adv., for the Destination Textile Private Limited. Mr.U.S. Menon, Adv.,for Ganesh Chandra Sen. The Court : Two individual offers have been received for the first property which is the land and the four-storied building at premises no.14A, Amritlal Bose Street, Sovabaz...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Abhijit Sen Vs. Sibendhu Basu and ors
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-20-2012
1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION (ORIGINAL SIDE)Present : The Hon'ble Justice Nadira Patherya G. A. No. 1725 of 2009 E. C. No. 49 of 2009 DR. ABHIJIT SEN VERSUS SIBENDHU BASU and; ORS. For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhrajit Mitra , Adv., Ms. Puja Das Choudhury, Adv., Ms. Radhika Singh, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. S.N.Mitra ,Sr. Adv., Mr. Rishad Madora, Adv., Mr. N. Dasgupta, Adv. Heard on : 18.2.10,30.7.10,2.8.10,6.9.10,14.9.10,23.9.10, 6.12.10,13.12.10,13.1.11 and 17.1.11 Judgment on : 20th January, 2012.Patherya, J. : This execution application has been filed to execute the decrees dated 30th March, 2004, 28th June, 2004 and 25th February, 2005. The case of the applicant Abhijit Sen (Sen) is that on 30th March, 2004 by consent of parties all disputes between Sen and respondent No.1 Shibendu Basu 2 (Basu) were settled. Several entities and individuals were added as parties to the said settlement. Subsequently by order dated 28th June, 2004 by consent ...
Tag this Judgment!Ravi Cement Products Limited Vs. Unknown
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-17-2012
CP No. 167 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction IN THE MATTER OF : RAVI CEMENT PRODUCTS LIMITED AND M/S. KANKANI CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 17th January, 2012. Appearance : Ms.Manju Bhuteria, Adv., for the petitioner. Mr.Reetobroto Mitra, Adv., for the company. The Court : The claim is on account of balance sum due upon the sale of a flat in Picnic Garden. The petitioner says that a principal amount of Rs.43.40 lakh is due and the company has no defence to such claim. The flat was sold by or about August, 2010 and the deed of conveyance was executed on August 3, 2010. The memorandum 2 of consideration appended to the deed of conveyance refers to three cheques having been made over by the vendee to the petitioning creditor. All the cheques were drawn on DBS Bank Limited. The first cheque was dated April 14, 2010 and was for Rs.5 lakh. The second cheque was dated July 26, 2010 and was for Rs.25 lakh. The third cheque ...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Dunlop India Ltd Vs. M/S. E.V. Mathai and Sons
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-13-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE CA No. 34 of 2012 CP No. 13 of 2009 IN THE MATTER OF: M/S. DUNLOP INDIA LIMITED AND IN THE MATTER OF : M/S. MADURA COATS LIMITED CP No. 233 OF 2008 M/S. DUNLOP INDIA LTD. Versus M/S. E.V. MATHAI and; SONS. CP No. 305 of 2008 IN THE MATTER OF M/S. DUNLOP INDIA LIMITED AND M/S. GREEN VALLEY SPECIFIED RUBBER (P) LTD. CP No. 437 of 2008 CA No. 410 of 2009 IN THE MATTER OF DUNLOP INDIA LTD. ANDIN THE MATTER OF INDUSTRIAL (INDIA) ENTERPRISE CP No. 13 of 2009 CA No. 28 of 2011 IN THE MATTER OF M/S. DUNLOP INDIA LIMITED AND M/S. MADURA COATS LIMITED. CP No. 278 of 2009 CA No. 111 of 2011 RE: M/S. DUNLOP INDIA LTD. AND KOTAYAM RUBBER COMPANY CP No. 279 of 2009 CA No. 114 of 2011 RE: M/S. DUNLOP INDIA LTD. AND AND JACOB THOMAS and; COMPANY CP No. 159 of 2011 CA No. 832 of 2011 2 CA No. 852 of 2011 IN THE MATTER OF :M/S. DUNLOP INDIA LTD. AND IN THE MATTER OF SBI GLOBAL FACTORS LTD. CA No. 110 of 2011 CP No. 308 OF 2009 IN THE MAT...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »