Kolkata Court May 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.
Srei Equipment Finance Pvt. Ltd. (Sefpl) Vs. Gurudev Mani Enterprises ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-15-2012
ORDER SHEET EC No.429 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE PVT.LTD.(SEFPL) Versus GURUDEV MANI ENTERPRISES & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date :15. h May, 2012. Appearance: Mr.Satarup Banerjee, Advocate Mr.Rajarshi Raichoudhury, Receiver The Court: The Receiver in his report dated 2nd April, 2012, submits that no less a person than the Inspector General of Police, Madhya Pradesh, obstructed him in carrying out the order dated 21st February, 2012. Let a copy of this order and the report be immediately sent by the Registrar (O.S.) to the Chief Secretary of the State of Madhya Pradesh as also to the Chief Secretary of this State. The petitioner is given liberty to take suitable steps against this alleged action by the Inspector General. The Receiver will revisit the site on a date and time specified by him to the Chief Secretary of Madhya Pradesh, the Director General of Police, Madhya Pradesh, the J...
L and T Finance Ltd. Vs. Manju Singh and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-15-2012
AP No.1082 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction L & T FINANCE LTD.Versus MANJ.SINGH & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :15. h May, 2012. Appearance: Mr.Priyankar Saha, Adv.Mr.Amal Kr. Sen, Adv.Mr.Divya Tiwari, Adv.The Court : The petitioner claims that the respondents have defaulted to the extent of Rs.17 lakh on account instalment payments without taking into account the interest and other charges leviable under the agreement. The respondents suggest that the figure is about Rs.5.43 lakh. The respondents say that they have made some recent payments and are continuing to make monthly instalment payments of Rs.1.43 lakh. Subject to the respondents paying to the petitioner a sum of Rs.5 lakh within a fortnight from date, the Receiver appointed in the matter will not take possession of the asset that forms the subject-matter of the agreement between the parties. Such payment must be made by way of a bankers cheque or demand draft o...
Smt. Priyanka Maity (Ghosh) Vs. Shri Sabyasachi Maity
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-2012
Soumen Sen, J. The order of the trial Judge in allowing the application under Section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 filed by the opposite party is the subject matter of challenge in this revisional application. The opposite party-husband filed a suit for divorce against the petitioner-wife under Section 13(i) and 13(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on 2nd May, 2011. The order of the trial Court shows that vide order no. 1 dated 2nd May, 2011 the suit has been registered and 6th July, 2011 was fixed for ascertaining the service of summons. However, no order was passed in relation to the application filed under Section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. On 6th July, 2011 the wife appeared and prayed for time to file written statement and pursuant thereto 9th August, 2011 was fixed for appearance. On 9th August, 2011, the husband filed a firisthi showing service of a copy of petition under Section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and on the self-same date, the wife filed a peti...
Hiralal Saha and Another Vs. State of West Bengal and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-2012
Aniruddha Bose, J. 1. The dispute in these two writ petitions relate to appointment of a distributor for essential commodities in Gopinathpur in the district of Hooghly. At present, appointment of such distributors is guided by the provisions of the West Bengal Public Distribution System (Maintenance and Supply) Control Order, 2003 (the 2003 Order). Applications for this vacancy however was invited in the month of February 1981. At that point of time, selection of distributors were made through procedures laid down in terms of executive instructions. Such distributorship was originally termed as M.R. Distributorship, and the same term continues to be used now also to describe such distributors. The writ petitioner in C.R. NO. 9951(W) of 1982 is one Hiralal Saha who lost out in the selection process. After applications were invited for appointment of distributors, Dulal Chandra Maity, who is the respondent no. 6 in that writ petition and the petitioner in W.P. No. 32042(W) of 2008 was i...
Chanda and Co. (Eng.) Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Oil India Limited and ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-2012
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE WP No.355 of 2012 Chanda & Co.(Eng.) PVT.LTD.& Anr. Versus Oil India Limited & ORS.BEFORE : The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA __________________________________________________________________ Date: May 14, 2012 __________________________________________________________________ Mr.Soumya Majumdar, Adv.with Mr.Sunny Nandy, Adv..for the petitioners Oil India Limited had entrusted the fiRs.petitioner with supply of pipe fittings. The fiRs.petitioner defaulted in discharging its obligation. The General Manager (Materials) of Oil India Limited by his memo dated 27th February, 2008, called upon the fiRs.petitioner to complete the outstanding supplies by 31st March, 2008, failing which it shall be debarred from receiving inquiries/orders for a period of one year w.e.f.1st April, 2008. Admittedly, the fiRs.petitioner could not complete the outstanding supplies and consequently suffered the penalty of bein...
Srei Equipment Finance Private Limited Vs. Saarthi Transport Private L ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-2012
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE APOT No.251 of 2012 GA No.1233 of 2012 GA No.1239 of 2012 AP No.629 of 2011 SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED Versus SAARTHI TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITD BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA A n d The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASIM KUMAR MONDAL Date :14. h May, 2012. The Court : There will be an order in terms of prayer (a).Having heard Mr.Utpal Bose, appearing for the appellant and Mr.Sanyal, appearing for the respondent and having gone through the impugned judgment and order, we are of the view that the learned Trial Judge was not unjustified in refusing to grant interim relief as prayed for. No statements and averments have been made to enable the Court to pass an order of furnishing security or to pass any order attaching before the judgment. Admittedly, it has become unliquidated money claim, which is yet to be decided by the learned Arbitrator. Moreover, we do not find any material placed bef...
RobIn Paul Vs. the Official Liquidator
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-2012
ORDER SHEET CA No.293 of 2004 With CP No.324 of 2001 CA No.173 of 2008 CA No.314 of 2008 CA No.419 of 2006 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction IN THE MATTER OF : THE NEW RED BANK TEA CO.PVT.LTD.And ROBIN PAUL Versus THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date :14. h May, 2012. Mr.Ariduddha Mitra for the petitioner. Mr.Jasobanta Rakshit for PF Authority. Mr.M.C. Ghose for Official Liquidator. Mr.Sondwip Mukherjee,Advocate/Special Officer appeaRs.The Court : By order dated 29th July, 2011 the Special Officer was directed to make payment of Rs.10 lakhs each to the Provident Fund authorities and Sales Tax authorities on an ad hoc basis. As the order dated 29th July, 2011 was not communicated to the Special Officer the directives contained therein have not been carried out. This day a copy of the said order has been made available to the Special Officer and the Special Officer is directed to implement the said order within the time stipulated therein. I...
Commissioner of Central Excise,kol.ii, Commissionerate Vs. M/S. Indian ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-2012
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction [Central Excise].ORIGINAL SIDE CEXA No.4 of 2005 GA No.726 of 2005 Form not EA 6 COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE,KOL.-II, COMMISSIONERATE Versus M/S.INDIAN ALUMINIUM Co.LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASIM KUMAR MONDAL Date :14. h May, 2012. The Court : This is an application for condonation of delay for about 724 days. Since affidavit was not filed within the time stipulated by the earlier order of the Court, though it was wrongly recorded in the order dated 7.5.2012 as being filed, we allow the same. However, the statements and averments made out in the application filed are enough whether the delay has to be condoned or not. Explanation sought to be given in the application to the effect that immediately after receipt of the certified copy of the order the department concerned took some time to take a decision to prefer appeal. We feel that the time taken by the department to take...
Banshidhar Paul and ors. Vs. Srish Chandra Pal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-2012
ORDER GA No.3694 of 2011 CS No.381 of 1889 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction BANSHIDHAR PAUL & ORS.Versus SRISH CHANDRA PAL BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE MAHARAJ SINHA Date:14. May 2012. Appearance: Mr.Kamalesh Bhattacharya, Advocate for plaintiffs and existing trustees of Trust Estate Rye Charan Paul. Mr.Pramit Kumar Ray, Bar-at-Law with Ms.Sonia Dutt and Ms.Kamalika Bhattacharya, Advocates for Anandam Limited Mr.Mojnu Sk., Advocate for Root Star Enclave PVT.LTD.Since I passed an order on 10 May 2012 accepting the highest offer of the intended purchaser, Anandam Limited for purchase of the property in question, the amount of Rs.5 lakh deposited by Root Star Enclave Private Limited with the advocate on record of the plaintiffs by bank draft is returned to Mr.Mojnu Sk., learned advocate on record of Root Star Enclave Private Limited in Court today and he accepts the same. The amount, namely Rs.6 lakh which learned advocate on record of Root Star Enclave P...
Magma Fincorp Limited Vs. Susanta Kumar SwaIn and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: May-14-2012
AP No.42 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction MAGMA FINCORP LIMITED Versus SUSANTA KUMAR SWAIN & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :14. h May, 2012. Mr.K.K. Pandey, Adv.appears The Court : On April 4, 2012 the Receiver filed a report from which it appeared that the respondents were willing to make over the asset that formed the subject-matter of the agreement between the parties to the financier. The financier also made a similar representation. The order dated April 4, 2012 required the petitioner to forward copies of such order to the respondents and to inform them that the matter would appear three weeks thereafter. Despite due service of copies of such order, as evident from an affidavit-of-service filed today, the respondents are not represented. The Receiver is permitted to obtain possession of the asset from the respondents, but the Receiver will not use any force. The Receiver will merely visit the location and inform th...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »