Kolkata Court December 2012 Judgments
Tarini Creations Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Reebok India Co. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-20-2012
GA No.3039 of 2012 CS No.371 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICITON Tarini Creations PVT.LTD.Versus Reebok India Co.& Anr. Before: The Hon'ble Justice I.P.MUKERJ.Date:20. h December 2012 Appearance: Mr.S.N. Mookherjee, Sr.Advocate Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Advocate Mr.Jishnu Choudhury, Advocate Mr.Anurag Bagaria, Advocate for the plaintiff Mr.Rajarshi Dutta, Advocate Mr.Sayantan Bose, Advocate for defendant No.1 Mr.Debnath Ghosh, Advocate Mr.Sanjay Ginodia, Advocate Ms.Preetu Choudhury, Advocate for defendant No.2 The dispute is between Reebok and one of their retailers in Kolkata, Tarini Creations Private Limited, the plaintiff. The plaintiff has been acting in this capacity from 2006 from an outlet on VIP Road. The arrangement was this. The plaintiff had deposited Rs.2 crores as security, Rs.29 lakhs towards rent and Rs.8 lakhs towards furniture and fixture and so on, aggregating to Rs.2.37 crores with the defendant Reebok. The premises did not belong eit...
Tag this Judgment!Chowringhee Prakashan (P) Ltd. Vs. Begwani Trade and Industries Pvt. L ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-20-2012
Form not J.(2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Original Side Present : The Honble Mr.Justice Ashim Kumar Banerjee And The Honble Ms.Justice Shukla Kabir (Sinha) A.P.O.No.74 of 2012 C.P.135 of 2010 Chowringhee Prakashan (P) LTD.-VSBegwani Trade & Industries PVT.LTD.And A.P.O.No.75 of 2012 C.P.105 of 2010 The Statesman LTD.versus Begwani Trade & Industries PVT.LTD.And A.P.O.No.76 of 2012 C.P.78 of 2010 The Statesman LTD.versus Paper Trade & Industries (P) LTD.For the Appellants For the Respondents : : Mr.Abhijeet Chatterjee, Senior Advocate Mr.Jayanta Kumar Banerjee, Senior Advocate Mr.Supriya Ranjan Saha, Advocate Mr.Sukanta Pal, Advocate Mr.Rudradeb Chowdhuri, Advocate Mr.Deep Nath Roy Chowdhury Advocate Mr.K.N.Jena, Advocate Heard on : December 3 & 11, 2012 Judgment on : December 20, 2012. ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE.J.The above three appeals would relate to a claim made by the three respondents being in the common management, as against the company above named. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-20-2012
CP No.401 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF: SKAUS ENGINEERING WORKS PVT.LTD.-AndTHE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, W.B.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : December 20, 2012. The Court : The Registrar is represented and a chart has been filed indicating that a sum of Rs.68,000/- would be payable by the company on account of filing fees, additional fees and penalty if the documents required to be filed earlier under the Companies Act, 1956 with the Registrar were to be filed belatedly now. The name of the company has been struck off under Section 560 of the 1956 Act and the petitioner has applied for restoration of the companys name. Subject to the petitioner paying a sum of Rs.90,000/- to the Registrar within three weeks from date and depositing all requisite documents within such time, the name of the company will be restored to the list of active companies and the company and its authorized officers will be given access...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Kurseong Carriers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. W.B. State Warehousing Coproratio ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-20-2012
AP No.226 of 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.KURSEONG CARRIERS PVT.LTD.Versus W.B.STATE WAREHOUSING COPRORATION BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :20. h December, 2012. Appearance: Mr.Samrat Sen, Adv.Mr.Subhransu Ganguly, Adv.Mr.Sakya Sen, Adv.Mr.Pallab Kumar Mitra, Adv..For the petitioner The Court : None appears on behalf of the respondent even at the second call. Though no affidavit-in-opposition appears in the records, the petitioner says that a copy of an affidavit-in-opposition has been forwarded to the petitioner. The challenge is under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to an award dated May 27, 2005 passed by the managing director of the respondent. The managing director of the respondent was the named arbitrator in the arbitration agreement between the parties. The short case of the petitioner is that the award has been passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice ...
Tag this Judgment!Wahiduzzman and ors. Vs. West Bengal Board of Secondary Education and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-20-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side Present : The Honble Justice Harish Tandon 20.12.2012 WP 106.of 2012 Wahiduzzman & ORS.versus West Bengal Board of Secondary Education & ORS.Mr.Tapabrta Chakraborty, Advocate with Mr.Sakti Pada Jana, Advocate for the petitioners Mr.Amit Prakash Lahiri, Advocate for the respondent nos.1 and 2 Mr.Kamalesh Bhattacharya, Advocate for the respondent no.3 The Court :- The petitioners claiming themselves to be some of the members of the Managing Committee of M.L.Jubilee Institution (HS) have impugned the order passed by the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education on 11.12.2012 whereby and whereunder an Administrator is appointed. On noticing the averments made in the writ petition it appears that certain allegations were levelled before the Board and a proceeding was initiated. In fact a show cause notice was issued by the Board following the procedure where the Board intended to rely upon the report of the Commissi...
Tag this Judgment!Raunak Coirs Limited and anr. Vs. West Bengal State Electricity Distri ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-20-2012
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE WP 106.OF 201.RAUNAK COIRS LIMITED AND ANR. Versus WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTI ON Co.LTD.AND ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date :20. h December, 2012. Mr.Subir Sanyal, Advocate for petitioners Mr.Sumit Kumar Panja, Advocate Mr.S.S.Kaley, Advocate .for respondents The Court :- By this writ petition the petitioner seeks to challenge the supplementary bill dated 3.12.2012 raised by the licensing company. The case of the petitioner is that it is a consumer of electricity supplied by the licensing company and has regularly paid all bills. There is no outstanding, therefore, the supplementary bill raised for the period 2006 to 2012 is unjustified . There is no provision under the 2006 regulation of the Central Electricity Regulation Commission for imposition of supplementary bill. Rule 4 of the said 2006 Regulation imposes a duty on the licensing company not only to make meter rea...
Tag this Judgment!Smt.Shyamali Sikdar Vs. the Union of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-18-2012
ORDER SHEET WP NO.691 OF 200.WITH GA NO.3567 OF 201.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SMT.SHYAMALI SIKDAR Versus THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE Dr. SAMBUDDHA CHAKRABARTI Date :18. h December, 2012. For Petitioner : Mr.Ashim Kr. Chatterjee, Mr.Swarup Paul, Ms.S.Chatterjee and Ms.M.Chakraborty, Advocates. For Victoria Memorial : Mr.A. Chowdhury, Sr.Advocate Hall. Mr.A, Ray and Mr.U.Mondal, Advocates. The Court : The petitioner was appointed at the Victorial Memorial Hall in the year 1989 on compassionate ground and as a daily rated casual worker. She has lots of grievances against her employer and the employer too perhaps has a lot to say about her. By the present writ petition the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for a writ in the nature of mandamus to allow the petitioner to sign her attendance register ; a direction upon the respondent Nos.3 and 4 not to torture and harass the petitioner in discharge of her official du...
Tag this Judgment!Lord Denning in Regina Vs. Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis,
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-18-2012
In the High Court at Calcutta Special Jurisdiction (Contempt) Original Side Present : Honble Mr.Arun Mishra, Chief Justice And Honble Justice Joymalya Bagchi. Dated :18. h December, 2012 T. No.29 of 2012 In the matter of : Publication made in the Times of India. and The Hindu., both Calcutta publications dated 15th August, 2012 And In the matter of : News Telecast made by ABP Ananda. and2. Ghanta. on 14th August, 2012 Mr.Bikash Bhattachara, Senior Advocate Mr.Hirak Mitra, Barrister-at-law and Senior Advocate And Mr.Ranjan Deb, Barrister-at-law and Senior AdvocateLd. Amicus Curiae Mr.S.Pal, senior Advocate for ABP Ananda. Mr.R.K.Khanna, Advocate.for the Hindu. Joymalya Bagchi, J. : On 16th August, 2012 Mr.Bikash Bhattacharya, Senior Advocate relying on two news items published in two English dailies namely The Times of India. and The Hindu. on 15th August, 2012 prayed for suo motu initiation of contempt proceeding under Article 215 of the Constitution of India and under Section 15 of th...
Tag this Judgment!Susanta Kumar Samal and anr. Vs. Magma Fincorp Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-18-2012
AP No.594 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction SUSANTA KUMAR SAMAL & ANR. Versus MAGMA FINCORP LIMITED BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :18. h December, 2012. Appearance: Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury, Adv.Ms.Noelle Banerjee, Adv.The Court : The respondents have not been able to make any payment despite several adjournments being granted. The petitioner claims that a sum in excess of Rs.12 lakh is due only on account of defaulted instalments. The Receiver is in possession of the two tippers that form the subject-matter of the agreement between the parties and offers have been invited for sale thereof. The best offer is of Rs.15.20 lakh from Vikash Agarwal of Shakti Petrol Pump, Ranchi. The respondents have not been able to procure any better offer for the two tippeRs.The sale of the two tippers is confirmed in favour of Vikash Agarwal at Rs.15.20 lakh, subject to the entire consideration being made by way of a demand draft or a pay order or l...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. E. V. Mathai and Sons Vs. Smifs Capital Markets Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-18-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction CA No.760 of 2012 IN THE MATTER OF: DUNLOP INDIA LTD.And CA No.765 of 2012 CP. No.233 of 2008 IN THE MATTER OF: DUNLOP INDIA LTD.And M/s.E.V. Mathai & Sons. And CA No.782 of 2012 IN THE MATTER OF: DUNLOP INDIA LTD.And CA No.198 of 2012 CP No.233 OF 200.M/S.DUNLOP INDIA LTD.-AndM/S.E.V.MATHAI & SONS. CP No.295 OF 200.M/S.DUNLOP INDIA LTD.-AndAMIYA KUMAR KUNDU & Co.(A 552.& ANR. CA No.378 of 2012 CP No.13 OF 200.DUNLOP INDIA LIMITED. -AndBITAN CHOWDHURY. CP No.297 of 2008 M/S.DUNLOP INDIA LIMITED -ANDM/S AMIYA KUMAR KUNDU & ORS.CP No.513 of 2011 M/S.DUNLOP INDIA LIMITED -ANDTHE INDIA TRADING COMPANY CP No.304 of 2008 M/S.DUNLOP INDIA LIMITED -ANDFREIGHT CARRIERS OF INDIA LTD.CP No.305 of 2008 M/S.DUNLOP INDIA LIMITED -ANDM/S.GREEN VALLEY SPECIFIED RUBBER (P) LTD.CP No.437 of 2008 CA No.410 of 2009 DUNLOP INDIA LTD.-ANDINDUSTRIAL (INDIA) ENTERPRISE CP No.13 of 2009 CA No.28 of 2011 M/S.DUNLOP INDIA LIMITED -ANDM/S.MADURA COATS LIMITED CP...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »