Kolkata Court May 2012 Judgments
Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Limited Vs. Mahesh Kumar Agarwal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-29-2012
GA No.1449 of 2012 CS No.187 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE DALMIA CEMENT (BHARAT) LIMITED Versus MAHESH KUMAR AGARWAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date :29. h May, 2012. (VACATION BENCH) Appearance : Mr.Pratap Chatterjee, Sr.Adv., Mr.Debnath Ghosh, Adv., Mr.Rahul Chandra, Adv., for the plaintiff. The Court : It appears that the plaintiff entered into agreement for purchase of the shares of the 31st defendant company and the said agreement as stated in the plaint was entered into at the registered office of the plaintiff company at 14, Netaji Subhas Road, Calcutta001. There were different modalities and formalities incorporated in the said agreement which are to be performed by the parties and the entire transaction was agreed to be concluded within 31st May, 2012. Despite having shown readiness and willingness to perform its part of the agreement, the conduct of the 2 defendants shows that the defendants are...
Tag this Judgment!Mahindra Retail Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Macropack Solutions and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-22-2012
GA No.1430 of 2012 APOT No.297 of 2012 APO No.202 of 2012 GA No.1207 of 2012 CS No.153 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction MAHINDRA RETAIL PVT.LTD.Versus MACROPACK SOLUTIONS & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE AND The Honble JUSTICE ASIM KUMAR MONDAL Date :22. d May, 2012. (VACATION BENCH) Appearance: Mr.Sanjay Kher, Adv.Mr.Anirban Roy, Adv.Mr.Arvind Jhunjhunwala, Adv.Mr.Adheesh Nargolka, Adv.Mr.Goutam Banerjee, Adv.for the appellant Mr.Sourav Moitra, Adv.for the respondent The Court : There will be an order in terms of prayer (a) of the petition relating to GA No.1430 of 2012. The appellant is aggrieved by an order dated May 18, 2012, the day the Court closed for the summer vacation, by which an ex parte order of May 15, 2012 was varied to a limited extent. The appellant submits that the order seriously impairs the appellant continuing its business. 2 The appellant, which is the defendant in a suit for infringement of a trade mark, ...
Tag this Judgment!The United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Sk. KamaluddIn and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-18-2012
Ashim Kumar Banerjee.J: CLAIMANT’S CASE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL Sk. Kamaluddin was the owner of an Ambassador car having registration no.W.B.J-9324. He earned rupees four thousand to five thousand per month. On May 31, 2000 Kamaluddin was driving the said Ambassador car when the offending vehicle, a Maruti Van, having registration no.W.B.V7655 dashed the ambassador car near Banamali Hotel on National Highway-6, P.S. Bagnan. The accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle. Kamaluddin was rushed to Bagnan Hospital with multiple injuries. He was shifted to Uluberia Hospital and then to Midnapur. After a prolonged treatment, he was declared disabled to the extent of fortyone per cent. He claimed a sum of Rs.1.5 lacs as compensation vide application dated August 5, 2000 made under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. In his application he contended that Shri Ram Natayan Yadav, the owner of the offending vehicle did not pay any compensation to him...
Tag this Judgment!Haldia Petrochemicals Limited Vs. Chatterjee Petrochem (Mauritius) and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-18-2012
There shall be an order in terms of prayer (a). Aggrieved by an order dated May 4, 2012 passed by learned Trial Judge in G.A. No.1191 of 2012 in C.S. 152 of 2012 the appellant has filed this appeal. By the said order the learned Trial Judge had refused to pass interim relief in favour of the plaintiff-appellant. Along with the appeal they had further taken out an application for injunction restraining respondent no.1 from further pursuing its request for arbitration made to the respondent no.8 on March 21, 2012 or from taking any further steps in connection therewith till the disposal of the appeal. We propose to dispose of the appeal and the application together. Bereft of all details, the plaintiff-appellant filed a suit before the learned Trial Judge, inter alia, for a decree and for a declaration that the arbitration agreement contained in the agreement, dated January 12, 2002, is void and/or unenforceable, a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendant no.1 in the suit...
Tag this Judgment!Tandra Bhattacharjee and Others Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of Indi ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-18-2012
1. Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereafter the Corporation), the opposite party herein, is presently the owner of “Metropolitan Building” at 7, Jawaharlal Nehru Road, Kolkata – 700013. 2. Metropolitan Building was earlier owned by Metropolitan Insurance Company Pvt. Ltd. Its Managing Director, Debendranath Bhattacharya (since deceased), had granted a monthly tenancy of flat no. 3, situate on the second floor of Metropolitan Building (hereafter the said flat) in favour of his wife Sovana Bhattacharya (since deceased). It was after the nationalization of private insurance companies in 1956 that the Corporation became the owner of Metropolitan Building and Smt. Sovana Bhattacharya a monthly tenant under it in respect of the said flat. 3. The Corporation had approached the Estate Officer under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 (hereafter the Act) seeking eviction of Smt. Sovana Bhattacharya from the said flat on the ground that she ...
Tag this Judgment!Amarendra Nath Mondal and Others Vs. Sri Subhas Dutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-18-2012
Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, J.: All these three appeals are taken up for consideration analogously as all these appeals are directed against orders dated February 27, 2011 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) First Court, at Barasat, district: North 24 – Parganas in Title Suit Nos. 286 of 2007, 289 of 2007 and 290 of 2007. By consent of Mr. Sudhis Dasgupta, learned senior advocate, appearing for the appellant in F.M.A.T. No. 379 of 2012, Mr. Bidyut Kumar Banerjee, learned senior advocate, appearing for the appellant in F.M.A.T. Nos. 380 – 381 of 2012 and Mr. Saktinath Mukherjee and Mr. Shyama Prasanna Roychowdhury, learned senior advocates, appearing for the respondents, all these appeals are taken up for final hearing analogously, upon dispensation of all formalities, to avoid conflicting judicial opinions. By the orders impugned, the learned trial judge allowed applications under Order 39, rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed...
Tag this Judgment!Dipak Chakraborty Vs. Board of Councillors, Bhadreswar Municipality an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-18-2012
Soumitra Pal, J. In this writ petition, the petitioner, the Chairman of Bhadreswar Municipality, has challenged the resolution adopted on 24th March, 2012 by the councillors of the said Municipality removing him from the post. Facts which require to be considered are that the total strength of the councillors in the said Municipality is 22. Pursuant to the election in 2010, on 18th June, 2010 Board was constituted. The petitioner was elected the Chairman. Subsequent to the election of councillors and after formation of the Board, one councilior expired. Therefore, at present the Board consists of 21 councillors. On 20th March, 2012, 9 councillors issued a notice for removal of the petitioner from the post of Chairman. On 24th March, 2012 10 members adopted a resolution for removal of the petitioner. Nine councillors voted against the resolution. 2 councillors abstained from voting. After resolution was passed, the petitioner addressed a letter dated 24th March, 2012, to the District Ma...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Sunilendu Sengupta Vs. Sri Brojodulal Mitra and Another
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-18-2012
Tarun Kumar Gupta, J. This second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 13th June, 2001 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, 5th Court, North 24-Parganas, Barasat in Title Appeal No.140 of 1996 affirming the judgment and decree of eviction dated 28th June, 1996 and 4th July, 1996 passed by the learned Munsif, 4th Court at Sealdah in Title Suit No.282 of 1990. Respondent as plaintiff filed a suit for eviction against the appellant-tenant, alleging default, and subletting after sending a notice under Registered Post with AD which returned with postal remarks ‘refused’. The appellant/defendant contested the said suit alleging, inter alia, that no notice was properly served. It was further case that though the defendant was residing at Andul, Howrah but he executed a power of attorney in favour of his brother Amalendu Bhusan Sengupta for looking after the tenanted premises on payment of rent. It is further case of the defendant-tenant...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Ashok Kumar Mukherjee Vs. Usha Rani Debi and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-18-2012
Tarun Kumar Gupta, J. Defendant tenant is the appellant against this judgment of confirmation. The respondent No.1 as the plaintiff filed a suit for eviction against the present appellant defendant tenant (defendant No.1) as well as against the proforma respondent No.2 (defendant No.2) alleged to be a sub-tenant. According to plaintiff, she purchased the suit property from one Latikabala Sadhukhan through a registered kobala dated 17th January, 1983. Defendant No.1 was a tenant in respect of the suit premises under Latikabala adhukhan who issued a letter of attornment to the tenant. In spite of receipt of letter of attornment, defendant tenant did not pay rent. He defaulted in payment of rent since February, 1983. He also illegally sub-let and transferred suit premises to the defendant No.2 without the knowledge and written consent either of the plaintiff or of earlier owner landlord. Suit premises was in exclusive possession of the defendant No.2. Accordingly, plaintiff landlord...
Tag this Judgment!Sha Abdul MomIn Village Mosque Public Wakf Estate Rep. by Its Mutwalli ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-18-2012
Tarun Kumar Gupta, J. The plaintiff is the appellant against this judgment of reversal. The plaintiff filed a suit being Title Suit No.162 of 1978 in the Court of learned Munsif, 4th Court, Burdwan alleging inter alia that properties described in schedule A, B and B1 were the properties of the plaintiff Wakf Estate. One Abdul Sovan Sarkar was the Mutwalli of the plaintiff Wakf Estate. Due to his inability the Commissioner of Wakfs appointed one Abdul Aziz Sarkar as co-mutwalli. Abdul Sovan Sarkar died in 1364 B. S. leaving behind proforma defendant 2-5 and widow Azema Bibi (since deceased) as his heirs. After death of Abdul Sovan Sarkar one of his sons namely, Rawswa Ali Sarkar was appointed co-mutwalli by the Commissioner of Wakf with the consent of other mutwalli Abdul Aziz Sarkar. The suit properties were all along wakf properties and not personal properties of any of the mutwallis. Suit properties appertaining to khatian No.84 and 86 of Mouza Mollasarul and Khatian No.15 of Mouza S...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »