Kolkata Court January 2012 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.
Shristi Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. Vs. Mfar Construct ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-11-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE AP No.897 of 2011 SHRISTI INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.Versus MFAR CONSTRUCTION PVT.LTD.& AP No.903 of 2011 MFAR CONSTRUCTION PVT.LTD.Versus SHRISTI INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.Appearance Mr.S.N.Mookherjee, Sr.Advocate Mr.Ranjan Bachawat, Advocate Mr.Ravi Kapur, Advocate Mr.Debnath Ghosh, Advocate Mr.Monot Kr. Tewari, Advocate Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury, Mr.P.K.Srivastava, Mr.J.Pandit, Ms.P.Goswami, Advocate Advocate Advocate Advocate BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :11. h January, 2012. The Court : A.P.No.897 of 2011 is the earlier petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 filed by the owner and A.P.No.903 of 2011 is the subsequent petition under Section 9 of the Act filed by the contractor. Under an agreement in writing dated March 13, 2009, the contractor was engaged by the owner for the construction of a building intended to be a fives...
Terai Tea Company Limited Vs. Nathmal Kedia and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-11-2012
1 A.P.O. No.435 of 2010 A.P.O.T.No.577 of 2010 Arising out of G.A.No.1331 of 2010 C.S.No.106 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE Terai Tea Company Limited Versus Nathmal Kedia & ORS.For the appellant : Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Sr.Advocate For respondent : Mr.Ahin Choudhuri, Sr.Advocate Mr.Roibat Banerji, Advocate Mr.S.S. Khanra, Advocate Heard on :09. 11.2011, 16.11.2011, 30.11.2011, 07.12.2011 and 14.12.2011 Judgement on :11. 01.2012 The Court : This is a plaintiffs appeal against the judgement and order dated October 6, 2010 dismissing its application for interim reliefs and also vacating all interim ordeRs.if any. In connection with a suit for specific performance the plaintiff had filed an application for injunction before the learned Trial Judge. The case of the plaintiff/ petitioner inter alia was that the respondent No.3 herein was the owner of a tea estate of which before August, 2009 the proforma respondent No.4 along with others held 98 ...
Subash Chandra Biswas Vs. the Controller of Thika Tenency
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-11-2012
GA No.29 of 2012 GA No.37 of 2012 APOT No.7 of 2012 WP No.744 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SUBASH CHANDRA BISWAS Versus THE CONTROLLER OF THIKA TENENCY GOVERNMENT & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PRANAB KUMAR CHATTOPADHYAY The Hon'ble JUSTICE MRINAL KANTI SINHA Date :11. h January, 2012. Mr.S.Sen Barat, Adv..for the Appellant Mr.Ram Anand Agarwal, Ms.Madhumita Roy, Adversus for the State Mr.Rajib Mullick, Adv.for respondent Nos.2 to 5 Mr.Subhankar Nag, Ms.Sayanti Mukherjee, Mr.Samarjit Dey, Adversus for respondent No.7 G.A.No.29 of 2012 This is an application for condoning the delay in preferring the appeal from the order dated 25th November, 2011 passed by a Learned Judge of this Court in G.A.No.2455 of 2011 arising out of W.P.No.744 of 2011. Having heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and going through the averments made in this application, we are satisfied that sufficient reasons have been furni...
Stewar Holl (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-11-2012
ITA No.91 of 2002 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction [Income Tax].ORIGINAL SIDE STEWAR HOLL (INDIA) LTD.Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX For Appellant : Mr.J.P.Khaitan, Senior Advocate with Mr.R.L. Mitra, Advocate BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SENGUPTA A n d The Hon'ble JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI Date :11. h January, 2012. This appeal was admitted for hearing by this Court on 20.9.2002 on the following substantial questions of law: (a) Whether on a proper construction of the provisions of section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and those of rule 8 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, the deduction under section 80HHC is to be computed and allowed before applying the said rule 8 and the Tribunal was justified in law in rejecting the appellants appeal?. (2) Whether on a proper interpretation of Section 32AB, sub-section (1) and sub-section (3).the investment deposit account allowance can be claimed by the assessee in respect of its profits of business or profession as envisaged u...
Big Boss Steel and Alloys Ltd Vs. Unknown
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-09-2012
CP No. 409 of 2011 CA No.684 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF : BIG BOSS STEEL and; ALLOYS LTD. AND S.K. SARAWAGI and; CO. PVT. LTD. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 9th January, 2012. Appearance : Mr.Reetobroto Mitra, Adv., Mr.S. Jhunjhunwala, Adv., Mr.P.C. Sen, Sr. Adv., Mr.A.N. Das, Adv., Mr.S.N. Saha, Adv., The Court: The claim is for refund of advance payment made. The petitioner claims to have made payment of a sum of Rs.1,22,40,000/- along with a purchase order for supply of 3,000 MT of iron ore by the company to the petitioner. The petitioner says that the company supplied 1577.14 MT out of the agreed quantity but failed to supply the balance. The 2 claim is in lieu of the company's failure to deliver the balance goods. The petitioner says that ledger accounts pertaining to the transactions for the period April 1, 2008 to June 12, 2009, duly confirmed by the company, would reveal that a sum of Rs.76,56...
Asit Kumar Dey Sarkar and Another Vs. Abn Amro Bank N.V., Credit Card ...
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-09-2012
Kalidas Mukherjee, President: This appeal arises out of the judgement and order passed by the Ld. District Forum, Kolkata, Unit I in DF Case No. 186/2010. The case of the Appellants, in short, is that there was deficiency in service by not issuing no claim certificate by the O.P. Bank in favour of the Complainants despite the fact that the matter was disposed of by the District Legal Services Authority, Kolkata by an order dated 24.03.2007. The Appellants Complainants prayed for a direction upon the O.P. to pay a sum of Rs.75,000/- for causing trauma and a direction upon the O.P. to pay the litigation cost amounting to Rs.25,000/-. When the matter came up for hearing before the Ld. District Forum the matter was heard and disposed of observing that the O.P. Bank had already issued no objection certificate and the statements showed zero balance. In such view of the matter, the Ld. District Forum disposed of the case. The Ld. Counsel appearing for the Appellants submits that when t...
Biplab Mitra Vs. Prasanta Kumar Majumdar and
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-06-2012
1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION (ORIGINAL SIDE) Present : The Hon'ble Justice Nadira Patherya E. P No. 1 of 2009 BIPLAB MITRA VERSUS PRASANTA KUMAR MAJUMDAR AND OTHERS For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajoy Krishna Chatterjee, Sr.Adv., Mr. Amales Ray, Adv., Mr. Asim Kr. Barman, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharyya, Sr.Adv., No.1 Mr. Arup Bhattacharya , Adv., For the ElectionCommission of India : Mr. Dipayan Chowdhury, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. Bhaskar Prosad Banerjee, Adv., No. 7 : Mr. Sankar Pd. Banerjee, Adv. Heard on : 17.6.11,20.6.11,24.6.11, 8.7.11,15.7.11 25.7.11,8.8.11,12.8.11,19.8.11 and 26.8.11. Judgment on : 6th January, 2012. 2 Patherya J. : 1. This Election Petition has been filed to challenge the parliamentary election in respect of the Balurghat Parliamentary Constituency. 2. PETITIONERS CASE 2.1 The case of the petitioner is that the election in respect of the said Constituency was held on 30th April, 2009 and result ...
Apo No. 401 of 2011 Aco No. 142 of Vs. Rajendra Prasad Rungta and ors
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-06-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE APO No. 401 of 2011 ACO No. 142 of 2011 SURESH KUMAR RUNGTA HUF VersusRAJENDRA PRASAD RUNGTA and; ORS. and; APO No. 402 of 2011 ACO No. 143 of 2011 SURESH KUMAR RUNGTA VersusRAJENDRA PRASAD RUNGTA and; ORS. and; APO No. 403 of 2011 ACO No. 144 of 2011 SURESH KUMAR RUNGTA VersusRAJENDRA PRASAD RUNGTA and; ORS. and; APO No. 404 of 2011 ACO No. 145 of 2011 SURESH KUMAR RUNGTA VersusRAJENDRA PRASAD RUNGTA and; ORS. and; APO No. 405 of 2011 ACO No. 146 of 2011 SURESH KUMAR RUNGTA VersusRAJENDRA PRASAD RUNGTA and; ORS. and; APO No. 406 of 2011 ACO No. 147 of 2011 SURESH KUMAR RUNGTA VersusRAJENDRA PRASAD RUNGTA and; ORS. Appearance Mr. D. Basak, Advocate Mr. A.K. Choubey, Advocate Mr. M. Saha, Advocate ...Appellant Mr. S.K. Kapur, Sr. Advocate Mr. Jishnu Saha, Advocate Mr. Reetobroto Mitra, Advocate Mrs. Madhu Priya, Advocate Mr. Atish Ghosh, Advocate ...Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 2 BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJ...
Ap No. 122 of 2011 Monoj Kumar Vs. M/S. Larson and Tubro Finance Ltd. ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-05-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE AP No. 122 of 2011 MONOJ KUMAR CHOUDHURY Versus M/S. LARSON and; TUBRO FINANCE LTD. and; ORS. AP No.770 of 2011 MANOJ KUMAR CHAUDHARY Versus M/S. LARSON and; TUBRO FINANCE LTD. and; ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 5th January, 2012. Appearance : Mr.Pradip Kumar, Adv., for the petitioner. Mr.Mainak Bose, Adv., for the respondent. The Court : AP No.122 of 2011 is a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by the award-debtor. AP No.770 of 2011 is the challenge to the award under Section 34 of the Act. The petitioning hirer says 2 that the vehicle that formed the subject-matter of the agreement between the parties was forcibly taken possession of by the financier, sold within a few days without allowing the petitioner any opportunity to participate in the sale to ensure a better price therefor and a huge amount was thereafter claimed with penal interest a...
M/S. Choudhury Construction Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-05-2012
AP No. 395 of 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction M/S. CHOUDHURY CONSTRUCTION Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL BEFORE:The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEEDate : 5th January, 2012. Appearance: Ms. Aparna Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Mainak Bose, Adv. The Court : This is a request under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for the constitution of an arbitral tribunal to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties relating to the contract for construction or widening of a road. The petitioner insists that there is an arbitration agreement between the parties. The respondent has denied the existence of any arbitration agreement. 2 No copy of the agreement between the parties is appended to the petition. The petitioner has relied on an extract from the general conditions of contract and has claimed in the petition that Clause 25 of the general conditions containing the arbitration agreement would be applicable to the contract between the parties....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »