Kolkata Court June 2012 Judgments
Sri Printex (P) Ltd. and anr. Vs. Reserve Bank of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-25-2012
ORDER SHEET WP No.429 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE Sr.PRINTEX (P) LTD.& ANR. Versus RESERVE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date :25. h June, 2012. Mr.Pratap Chatterjee, Sr.Adv.Mr.Nimesh Mishra, Adv.Mr.Debasis Karmakar, Adv.for the petitioners Mr.D.B.Das, Adv.for the respondents The Court : The respondent No.2 bank approached the Debts Recovery Tribunal by filing an application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, registered as O.A.No.26 of 2003. In connection with such application, an affidavit was filed on behalf of the bank. It was averred therein that the amount of NPA dated 3rd April, 1998 is Rs.21,31,867.67 p. It is not in dispute that the application is pending before the Tribunal. The bank published a scheme for one time settlement of NPAs of SME (SBI OTS SME, 2010).It was a non-discretionary and nondiscriminatory scheme fixing 31st May...
Tag this Judgment!Gulabrai Manoharlal Company Ltd.(In Liqn.) Vs. Gita Devi Agarwal and o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-25-2012
ORDER SHEET ACO NO.32 OF 201.APO NO.209 OF 200.CP NO.324 OF 195.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF: GULABRAI MANOHARLAL COMPANY LTD.(IN LIQN.) Versus GITA DEVI AGARWAL & ORS.-VS-KRISHNA MURARI BAKREWALA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE SHUKLA KABIR (SINHA) Date :25. h June, 2012. Mr.R.K.Jaiswal, Adv., for the appellant. The Court : Despite repeated call, the Joint Special Officers are not present. The company was wound up by the learned Company Judge. The prayer for stay was refused. Hence, the appeal filed by some of the contributories. The Division Bench disposed of the appeal vide order dated 20th December, 2005. The order is quoted below: We have, at this stage, found out that the parties are agreeable with regard to the stay of the winding-up petition. We also found out from the report of the Official Liquidator that there is no claim lying against the Company earlier passed an (In Liquidati...
Tag this Judgment!Hindustan Unilever Ltd. Vs. Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-25-2012
ORDER SHEET GA No.1687 of 2012 CS No.222 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LTD.Versus RECKITT BENCKISER (INDIA) LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date :25. h June, 2012. Appearance: Mr.Sudipto Sarkar, Sr.Advocate Mr.Pratap Chatterjee, Sr.Advocate Mr.S.N.Mookerji, Sr.Advocate Mr.Ratnanko Banerjee, Advocate Mr.A.Jhunjhunwala, Advocate Mr.A.Bansal, Advocate for the plaintiff The Court: This is an interlocutory application in aid of a suit complaining of disparagement of goods. In the morning, Mr.S.N.Mookerji, learned Senior Advocate, mentioned this application. He wanted leave to move it at 2 P.M.today. I granted such leave but directed the plaintiff to serve notice of this application along with a copy of the petition upon the defendant. An affidavit of service has been filed which shows that the Eastern Regional Office of the defendant was served today at 11.40 A.M.None appears for the defendant. The plai...
Tag this Judgment!Magma Fincorp Ltd. Vs. Sukhmani Engineers and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-25-2012
ORDER SHEET AP No.400 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL SIDE MAGMA FINCORP LTD.Versus SUKHMANI ENGINEERS & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE Date :25. h June, 2012. Appearance: Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury, Adv.Mr.Santanu Chowdhury, Adv.The Court :- This application has been filed for appointment of a Receiver to collect the receivables of the respondents from the organizations specified in the petition. The respondent no.1 obtained finance from the petitioner for purchase of the assets specified in paragraph 3 of the petition. An agreement was executed in terms whereof the amount financed was to be repaid in equated monthly instalments. The agreement was executed on January 8, 2010. On the same day i.e.8th January, 2010 the respondent No.1 executed an agreement whereby the respondent no.1 agreed to assign its receivables. Disputes arose in connection with the finance agreement which contains an arbitration clause. The petitioner invoked the arbitration clause and ma...
Tag this Judgment!Pramod Kumar Rai Vs. M/S.Cholamandalam Das Finance Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-25-2012
ORDER SHEET APO NO.212 OF 201.AP NO.219 OF 201.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE PRAMOD KUMAR RAI Versus M/S.CHOLAMANDALAM DAS FINANCE LTD.& ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE SHUKLA KABIR (SINHA) Date :25. h June, 2012. Mr.Moloy Ghosh, Adv., for the appellant. Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury, Adv., Mr.P.K.Srivasta, Adv., Mr.Chayan Gupta, Adv., for the respondent. The Court : The agreement entered into by and between the parties would incorporate the jurisdiction clause which is set below : This Agreement has been accepted and executed by the Company at Chennai and all covenants, terms and conditions hereof including payments shall be observed and performed at Chennai and the Borrower/s specifically agrees, subject herein, that to the Courts Arbitration in Chennai clause alone contained shall have exclusive jurisdiction over any matter arising out of concerning this Agreement.The learned Judge correctly held that this Cou...
Tag this Judgment!L and T Finance Limited Vs. Mr. Sanjib Kumar Panda and anr
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-25-2012
AP No.423of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction L & T FINANCE LIMITED Versus Mr.SANJIB KUMAR PANDA & ANR BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE Date :25. h June, 2012. Mr.Sataroop Banerjee, Adv.for the petitioner The Court : A loan cum hypothecation agreement has been executed between the petitioner and the respondent Nos.1 and 2 both of whom reside at Balasore district in Orissa. The address of the petitioner as given in the loan-cum- hypothecation agreement is that of its registered office at L & T House, Ballard Estate, Mumbai 400001. The loan-cum-hypothecation agreement has a jurisdiction clause which is as follows: This agreement shall be governed by and construed in all respects with the Indian laws and the parties hereto agree that any matter or issues arising hereunder or any dispute hereunder shall, at the option/discretion of the Lender, be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the Courts of the city of Mumbai. This shall not, h...
Tag this Judgment!Ranjana Dutta Vs. Ashim Kumar Dutta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-25-2012
ORDER SHEET APO No.155 of 2012 CP No.91 of 1973 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE In the Matter of: NATABAR DUTTA PROPERTIES PVT LTD (In Liquidation) RANJANA DUTTA Versus ASHIM KUMAR DUTTA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE SHUKLA KABIR (SINHA) Date :25. h June, 2012. Appearance: Mr.Mainak Bose, Advocate For the appellant. Ms.Smita Das Dey, Advocate for the O.L.Mr.S.Das, Advocate for the The Court : - This appeal would arise out of an order declining to stall the sale of the property belonging to the Company (In Liquidation) at the instance of a contributory. Ranjana Dutta, the appellant abovenamed claimed that her husband being a contributory of the Company (In Liquidation) filed appeal along with another contributory for staying the order of winding up. However, the other contributory withdrew the said appeal without any knowledge of her husband. She was also not in the knot of the fact that such appeal was withdrawn....
Tag this Judgment!Mr. D.Basu and Mr. P.K.Misra,ad Vs. for the Company : Mr. Arindam Mukh ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-25-2012
C.P.326 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction In the matter of : TRADECo.INFRASTRUCTURE PVT.LTD.And In the matter of : M/S.S.S.INFRASTRUCTURE Petitioner BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASHOKE KUMAR DASADHIKARI Date :25. h June, 2012. For Petitioenr : Mr.B.Basak with Mr.D.Basu and Mr.P.K.Misra,Adversus For the Company : Mr.Arindam Mukherjee with Mr.S.Saha, Advocates THE COURT : This winding up application has come up for final hearing after admission. On 23rd March, 2011 the application for winding up was admitted upon proper consideration of the matter. In the order dated 23rd March, 2011 it was recorded that the Company did not give reply to the statutory notice. At the admission stage in spite of service of notices Company did not appear not filed any affidavit against the winding up petition and order for paper publication was made. After paper publication when the matter appeared before this Court, the Company made a prayer for recalling the order dated 23rd March...
Tag this Judgment!Pawan Kr. Churiwal and ors. Vs. Pawan Projects Pvt Ltd and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-25-2012
CA No.413 of 2012 CP No.179 of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION IN THE MATTER OF: PRIME RETAIL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.AND PAWAN KR. CHURIWAL & ORS.-VSPAWAN PROJECTS PVT LTD & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :25. h June, 2012. Appearance: Mr.S.N. Mookerjee, Sr.Adv.Mr.Shyam Sarkar, Sr.Adv.Mr.Pramit Roy, Adv.Mr.D.Basak, Adv.Mr.D.N. Sharma, Adv.The Court : There is a serious charge of fraud which has been made by the applicants. The applicants say that a company over which the applicants exercised overwhelming control has been sought to be merged into another with papers relied on before Court without any notice to or knowledge of the applicants. Several persons seek to intervene. No leave is granted yet to any person to intervene. It is submitted on behalf of the transferee company that the applicants had ceased to be shareholders of the relevant transferor company long prior to the scheme of amalgamation being carried to Court for sanctio...
Tag this Judgment!Gulabrai Manoharlal Company Ltd.(In Liqn.) Vs. Gita Devi Agarwal and o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-25-2012
ORDER SHEET ACO NO.31 OF 201.APO NO.209 OF 200.CP NO.324 OF 195.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF: GULABRAI MANOHARLAL COMPANY LTD.(IN LIQN.) Versus GITA DEVI AGARWAL & ORS.-versus KRISHNA MURARI BAKREWALA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE SHUKLA KABIR (SINHA) Date :25. h June, 2012. Mr.Subrata Mukherjee, Adv., for the appellant. The Court : Despite repeated call, the Joint Special Officers are not present. The company was wound up by the learned Company Judge. The prayer for stay was refused. Hence, the appeal filed by some of the contributories. The Division Bench disposed of the appeal vide order dated 20th December, 2005. The order is quoted below: We have, at this stage, found out that the parties are agreeable with regard to the stay of the winding-up petition. We also found out from the report of the Official Liquidator that there is no claim lying against the Company earlier passed an (In...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »