Kolkata Court February 2012 Judgments
Bijay Kumar Agarwal Vs. Narayani Devi Agarwal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-16-2012
GA No.341 of 2012 With CS No.61 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE In the matter of: Bijay Kumar Agarwal Versus Narayani Devi Agarwal & ORS.Before: The Honble Justice I.P.MUKERJ.Date:16. 02.2012 Appearance: Mr.Sumon Dutta, Adv.Mr.G.S.Gupta, Adv..for the plaintiff. Mr.Manju Agarwal, Adv.Mr.B.Manot, Adv., . .for the defendant No.1. Mr.S.K.Ghosh Adv..for the defendant No.3. The Court: This is another application in a partition and administration suit. The applicant is the plaintiff. The grievance is restricted to 1/1, Jagmohan Mullick Lane, Kolkata 700007. My attention is drawn to a judgment and order dated 6th June, 2011 passed by a Division Bench of our Court in APOT No.158 of 2011, GA No.1204 of 2011, CS No.61 of 2011 (Bijay Kumar Agarwal versus Narayani Devi Agarwal & Ors.) By that judgment and order the Honble Appeal Court had disposed of an appeal preferred from an order of the learned Trial Judge 2 refusing to pass an order of i...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Himalaya Construction Vs. Union of India
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-15-2012
A.P.No.1022 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S. HIMALAYA CONSTRUCTION -Versus- UNION OF INDIA Appearance: Ms. Aparna Banerjee, Adv. ...For the petitioner. Mr.Pradeep Tarafdar, Adv. ...for the respondent. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : February 15, 2012. The Court : The facts are not in dispute in the present request under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The petitioner was awarded a contract by the Central Public Works Department. The work was to be completed by 2007 but the tenure thereof was subsequently extended. At the time of the final extension of the period for completion of the work being granted, the petitioning contractor made a declaration that the contractor had not suffered any loss on account of delay in the implementation of the project. The work was admittedly completed sometime in the year 2009. By a letter dated May 12, 2011, the petitioner made a claim before the s...
Tag this Judgment!Jogendra Kristo Dutt Vs. Nripendra Kristo Dutt and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-15-2012
1 G.A. No. 2447 of 2011 G.A. No. 2442 of 2011 G.A. No. 2578 of 2011 C.S. No. 592 of 1975 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction JOGENDRA KRISTO DUTT .........Plaintiffs -Vs - NRIPENDRA KRISTO DUTT and; OTHERS ..............DefendantsFor the petitioner / : Mr. Sakya Sen, Advocate with the first defendant group in Mr. Anirban Pramanik, Advocate G.A. No. 2442 of 2011For the petitioner/ : Mr. H.K. Mitra, Senior Advocate with the first defendant group in Mr. Sondwip Mukerjee, G.A. No. 2578 of 2011 Mr. M. Seal, AdvocatesFor the petitioner/ : Mr. Ahin Choudhuri, Senior Advocate with the first defendant group in Ms. Lopita Banerjee, Advocate G.A. No. 2447 of 2011Heard on : 07.02.12 and; 08.02.2012.Judgment on : 15th February, 2012I.P. MUKERJI, J.This partition and administration suit has become extremely contentious between the parties.Three applications were taken out, each by a party or a group of parties. The application which was urged with the greatest force w...
Tag this Judgment!Unknown Vs. Coal India Limited and ors
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-15-2012
1 G.A. No. 1058 of 2011 Civil Suit No. 77 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction SHYAM SEL and; POWER LIMITED ......Plaintiff/Petitioner Vs COAL INDIA LIMITED and; ORS .....Defendants/RespondentsFor the Petitioner : Mr. Anindya Kr. Mitra, Advocate General Mr. Kalyan Bandhopadhay, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Abhrajit Mitra, Mr. Jishnu Choudhury, Mr. Mohit Gupta, Mr. Abhijit Sarkar, AdvocatesFor the Respondents : Mr. P.C. Sen, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Kallimuddin Mondal, Mr. Sourja Sadhan Bose, Mr. Mikhil Kumar Roy, Mr. Partha Basu, AdvocatesHeard on : 01.02.2012Judgment on : 15th February, 2012 2I.P. MUKERJI, J.This is an interlocutory application in aid of the above suit instituted in this Court by the plaintiff against the defendants. This suit is marked as C.S. 77 of 2011.Before considering this application the claims in the plaint must be examined. They are as follows: "............................. (a) Mandatory injunction directing the defendant No. 2 t...
Tag this Judgment!Sahyogi Distributors Ltd. and ors. Vs. Corporation Bank
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE TA No.12 of 2012 With CS No.56 of 2012 In the matter of: Sahyogi Distributors LTD.& ORS.Versus Corporation Bank TA No.13 of 2012 With CS No.57 of 2012 In the matter of: Vikash Metal & Power LTD.& ORS.Versus Corporation Bank TA No.15 of 2012 With CS No.56 of 2012 In the matter of: Sahyogi Distributors LTD.& ORS.Versus Corporation Bank TA No.16 of 2012 With CS No.57 of 2012 Vikash Metal & Power LTD.& ORS.Versus Corporation Bank Before: The Honble Justice I.P.MUKERJ.Date:14. 02.2012 Appearance: Mr.Pratap Chatterjee Sr.Adv.Mr.Amitesh Banerjee, Adv.Mr.Anirban Roy, Adv.Mr.S.N.Pyne, Adv.Mr.Amitava Das, Adv.Mr.R.C.Prusti, Adv.Mr.Sourav Mukherjee, Adv.The Court: Both these applications could not be taken up, entirely, today. I have been able to hear some submissions on behalf of both parties. It appears that the interim order dated 9th February, 2012 in terms of prayer (a) in TA No.12 of 2012 with CS No.56 of 2012 ...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Subhrajit Saha Vs. Allahabad Bank and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-2012
ORDER SHEET SHEET NO.1 WP No.919 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF:SHRI SUBHRAJIT SAHA Versus ALLAHABAD BANK & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE Date :14. h February, 2012. For Petitioner :Mr.Tapas Kumar Banerjee, Advocate. For Respondents :Mr.Partha Bhattacharyay, Advocate. The Court:-The writ petitioner has been subjected to a departmental proceeding on the allegation of misappropriation of a large sum of money from the Assansole Branch of Allahabad Bank being respondent No.1 herein. It has been alleged in the memorandum of charges that such misappropriation had taken place while the writ petitioner was posted as Senior Manager at the said branch. The memorandum of charges was issued on 20th December, 2010. A criminal complaint was lodged by the bank against the petitioner with the Superintendent of Police, Central Bureau of Investigation on 22nd June, 2010 in connection with two broad allegations of mis...
Tag this Judgment!Abhishek Bhiwaniwalla Vs. Amarendra Nath Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-2012
AP No.1073 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ABHISHEK BHIWANIWALLA -VersusAMARENDRA NATH DAS Appearance: Mr.Anuj Singh, Adv...For the petitioner. Mr.Rupak Ghosh, Adv...For the respondent. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :February 14, 2012. The Court : The claim is on account of payment under an agreement and the cheques issued in such regard having been dishonoured upon presentation. The parties entered into an agreement on December 19, 2009 under which the petitioner was to effect supplies of certain electrical components to the respondent in respect of a contract awarded to the respondent by the Assam State Electricity Board. The agreement between the parties hereto envisaged that out of the 64% of the billed amount that would be realized initially from the Assam State Electricity Board in respect of the bills raised on it by the respondent, a part of the petitioners costs on account of supply would be covered. T...
Tag this Judgment!Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-2012
ORDER SHEET CP NO.294 OF 201.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction IN THE MATTER OF : M/S.KEDARNATH ELECTRONICS PVT.LTD.-ANDHDFC BANK LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :14. h February, 2012. Appearance : Mr.A.Mitra, Adv., for the petitioner. The Court : None appears on behalf of the company even at the second call. None appeared at an earlier stage to take directions for communicating filing the affidavits. directions for Despite filing the petitioner affidavits, the company has chosen not to file an affidavit. The petitioners claim is on account of money lent and advanced. By the statutory notice of March 21, 2011, the petitioner claimed that the petitioner had disbursed an amount of Rs.15 lakh to the company which the company was liable to repay in 36 equated monthly instalments of Rs.54,606/-. The petitioner asserted in the statutory notice that on account of defaulted instalments, a sum of Rs.5,48,623.71 remained due. The petitioner claimed sundry o...
Tag this Judgment!Vs. Sardarmull Kankaria
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-2012
ORDER SHEET APDT No.1 of 2012 GA No.35 of 2012 CS No.30 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE KOLKATA IMPROVEMENT TRUST Appellant Versus SARDARMULL KANKARIA Respondent BEFORE: The Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE The Hon'ble JUSTICE Dr. SAMBUDDHA CHAKRABARTI Date :14. h February, 2012. For Appellant : Mr.P.S.Bose, Mr.R.K.Kali and Mr.S.Talukdar, Advocates For Respondent: Mr.Mr.Mr.Mr.Pramit Roy, Souvik Sen, P. Mukherjee and A. Banerjee, Advocates The Court : This is an application for stay of operation of the judgment and decree dated September 29, 2011, passed by the Learned Trial Judge plaintiff/respondent filed in a C.S.suit No.30 inter alia of for 2011. a decree The of declaration as well as a decree for specific performance of the agreement dated September 3, 2001, annexed to the plaint and for other reliefs. By Learned the judgment Trial Judge and decree directed that impugned there in would this be appeal a the decree as claimed in terms of prayers ...
Tag this Judgment!Amardas Nandy Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-14-2012
WP No.899 OF 201.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE AMARDAS NANDY Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BISWANATH SOMADDER Date :14. h February, 2012. Mr.Dilip Kundu, Advocate Mr.Chanchal Kumar Dutta, Advocate for petitioner. Mr.Biswajit Saw, Advocate Mr.Lalit Mahato, Advocate for the State. The Court :- The only issue that falls for consideration in the facts of the instant case is whether deduction of any amount from the pensionary benefits being received by the writ petitioner is permissible in law in the absence of any misrepresentation made by the petitioner in order to receive any excess amount paid to him whilst in service, particularly when no fraud has been alleged to have been practiced by the writ petitioner in order to receive such excess amount. In the facts of the instant case, the writ petitioner was in service under the Directorate of Panchayats and Rural Development, Government of West Bengal since 3rd J...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »