Kolkata Court July 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.
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-18-2012
G.A.No.1128 of 2012 G.A.No.1340 of 2012 G.A.No.1519 of 2012 C.S.No.133 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction In the matter of: LEILA PASSAH ..Plaintiff/Petitioner -And- Ms.MARGARET MADEIRA & ORS....Defendants/Respondents For the Plaintiff : Mr.Pratap Chatterjee, Senior Advocate with Mr.Raja Basu Chouwdhury, Mr.R.N.Bhattacharya, Advocates For the Defendants Nos.1,2,3,6 & 8 : Mr.Ranjan Bachawat, Advocate with Mr.Debnath Ghosh, Mr.Bimalendu Das, Ms.S.Das, Advocates For Defendant Nos.9, 10 & 11 : Mr.Basudeb Biswas, Advocate with Mr.Partha Mukherjee, Advocate Heard on :20. 06.2012, 21.06.2012 & 27.06.2012 Judgment :18. h July, 2012 I.P.MUKERJI, J. As all the relevant papers were available with the Court at the New Motion stage, by consent of the parties, the interlocutory application made by the plaintiff, the application for vacation of the interim order, made by the first, second, third, sixth and eighth defendants (hereafter the above defendants) and ...
Sandeep Kumar Tyagi and anr Vs. the O/L and anr
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-18-2012
CA No.410 of 2012 CP No.348 of 2003 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION IN THE MATTER OF: M/S HOOGHLY INK COMPANY (DELHI) P. LTD.(IN LIQN.) -ANDIN THE MATTER OF: SANDEEP KUMAR TYAGI & ANR -VSTHE O/L & ANR BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :18. h July, 2012. APPEARANCE: Mr.S.B. Mookerji, Sr.Adv.Mr.Nilay Sengupta, Adv.Ms.Ruma Sikdar, Adv.Ms.S.Dey, Adv.The Court : CA No.410 of 2012 is an application for modification of the order dated April 18, 2012 by which the applicant was directed to make payment of a total amount of Rs.65 lakh in instalments. The applicant has defaulted in making payment of some instalments and has sought an extension of the time to make the payment. It is submitted on behalf of the applicant and the Official Liquidator that a total amount of Rs.14,56,000/- has been paid by the applicant. Since the original amount required to be paid was Rs.65 lakh, a sum of Rs.56,44,000/- remains to be paid. Such amount of Rs.56,44,000/- be paid in 13 ...
L and T Finance Limited Vs. Bhagwandas Auto Finance Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-18-2012
AP No.505 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE L & T FINANCE LIMITED Versus BHAGWANDAS AUTO FINANCE LTD.& ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :18. h July, 2012. Appearance: Mr.Sakya Sen, Adv.The Court : None appears on behalf of the respondents despite service. Pursuant to directions of Court the Receiver appointed in previous proceedings under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has taken possession of the excavator that forms the subjectmatter of the agreement between the parties. The sale of the excavator was confirmed at a price of Rs.16.5 lakh, but the purchaser did not pursue the matter necessitating the present application for confirmation of the sale in favour of a person who has offered Rs.13.75 lakh. Since the respondents are not represented despite service, it may be presumed that they do not object to the sale. The sale of the excavator is confirmed in favour of Mansoor A Minsuriya of ...
Ashdene Investments Ltd. and ors. Vs. Warren Tea Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-18-2012
ORDER SHEET GA No.2868 of 2011 GA No.2961 of 2011 GA No.2962 of 2011 CS No.229 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ASHDENE INVESTMENTS LTD.& ORS.Versus WARREN TEA LTD.& ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date :18. h July, 2012. Appearance: Mr.Sudipto Sarkar, Sr.Advocate Ms.Mousumi Bhattacharjee, Advocate Mr.P.K.Dutt, Advocate Mr.Mr.Mr.Mr.Ratnanko Banerjee, Advocate Anikt Agarwal, Advocate Vivek Jhunjhunwala, Advocate Samik Kanti Chakraborty, Advocate The Court: It was submitted that a demerger scheme under the laws of England was approved in that country on 9th February, 2011. Furthermore, by virtue thereof, the shares held by foreign companies covered by the scheme in Warren Tea Ltd., Maple Hotels & Resorts PVT.LTD.and Warren Industrial LTD.stood automatically transferred in favour of the fiRs.six petitioneRs.without any further act or deed and by operation of law. Therefore, compliance with Section 108 of Companies Act, 195...
Dafodil Nursing Home Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-18-2012
AP No.328 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE DAFODIL NURSING HOME PVT.LTD.Versus BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD.& ANR. Appearance Mr.Nirmalya Dasgupta, Advocate Mr.Dibanath Dey, Advocate Mr.Sanajit Kr. Ghosh, Advocate BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :18. h July, 2012. The Court : The respondent does not dispute the existence of the arbitration agreement. The arbitration clause is contained in the agreement dated June 1, 2010. The clause provides as follows :P. DISPUTES SETTLEMENT/ ARBITRATION :Any difference or dispute shall be settled on mutual discussions. Unresolved issues, if any, be referred to the sole arbitrator for adjudication and the decision of the Arbitrator shall be final and binding on both the parties. Chief General Manager, BSNL, West Bengal Telecom. Circle or any other officer nominated by him on his behalf will function as Arbitrator. By a letter dated September 12, 2011, Advocate representing the petiti...
R. Piyarelall Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Fair Deal Suppliers Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-18-2012
GA No.1671 No.2012 GA No.2373 of 2011 AP No.388 of 2011 AP No.538 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE R. Piyarelall Iron & Steel PVT.LTD.Versus Fair Deal Suppliers LTD.Before: The Honble Justice I.P.MUKERJ.Date:18. h July 2012 Appearance: Mr.Pratap Chatterjee, Sr.Advocate Mr.Ranjan Bachawat, Advocate Mr.Amitesh Banerjee, Advocate Mr.Jayjit Ganguly, Advocate Mr.Sayantan Bose, Advocate Mr.Rudrajit Sarkar, Advocate Mr.Prodeep Sancheti, Advocate Ms.Ankita Mukherjee, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.Ranjan Deb, Advocate Mr.Dipak Dey, Advocate Ms.Noelle Banerjee, Advocate for the respondent Four applications were heard by me. AP No.388 of 2011 was the Section 9 application made by the petitioner. GA No.1671 of 2012 was an interim application made by the petitioner in aid of this Section 9 application. GA No.2373 of 2011 was an application by the respondent for discharge of the interim order and for dismissal of the Section 9 application take...
Ranjana Dutta Vs. Ashim Kumar Dutta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-18-2012
1 ORDER SHEET ACO No.154 of 2012 APO No.155 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE RANJANA DUTTA Versus ASHIM KUMAR DUTTA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE SHUKLA KABIR (SINHA) Date :18. h July, 2012. Appearance: Mr.Mainak Bose with Mr.P.Das Advocates For the appellant. Mr.Soumen Dutta and Ms.Iti Dutta, Advocates for the respondent no.1 Mr.Sudipto Bose, Advocate For Mr.Tapan Dey and Mr.S.Dey. Mr.Rajashi Dutta and Arnab Dutt, Advocates for the Rama Dutta, occupier. The Court :- This application for modification has been made by the applicant only to clarify that our order dated June 25, 2012 should specifically set aside the judgment and order impugned in the appeal. We have heard Mr.Mainak Bose, learned Advocate appearing for the applicant at length. Mr.Bose submits that the Division Bench considered the rival contentions resolving the controveRs.while disposing of the appeal. Hence the order of the learned Single J...
Smt. Shakuntala Murmu Vs. Kishore Prasad Bhagat
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-13-2012
Prasenjit Mandal, J. This application is at the instance of the plaintiff and is directed against the Order No.183 dated August 26, 2003 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 6th Court, Howrah in Title Suit No.163 of 1991 thereby rejecting the objection filed by the plaintiff against the report of the learned Commissioner under Order 26 Rule 9 of the CPC. The plaintiff/opposite party herein instituted the suit being Title Suit No.163 of 1991 for recovery of possession, permanent injunction and other reliefs against the defendant/opposite party herein. The defendant/opposite party herein is contesting the said suit by filing a written statement denying the material allegations raised in the plaint. In that suit, the plaintiff filed an application for local investigation and that application was allowed. Accordingly, the investigation was held in presence of both the parties and the learned Commissioner submitted his report holding, inter alia, that there was no encroachme...
Larsen and Toubro Ltd. Vs. Visa Power Ltd
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-12-2012
ORDER SHEET APOT NO.345 OF 201.GA NO.1851 OF 201.AP NO.522 OF 201.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE LARSEN & TOUBRO LTD.Versus VISA POWER LTD BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE SHUKLA KABIR (SINHA) Date :12. h July, 2012. Mr.Karanthaneri Menakshisundaram Subramanium, Mr.Subramanya Keshav Bhatt, appear in person. The Court : In view of lawyers not being present, Mr.K.M.Subramanium, a Project Director of Larsen and Toubro Limited, the appellant abovenamed company assisted by Mr.S.K.Bhatt, Chief Legal Advisor of the appellant company argues the matter. Despite notice being given, the respondent is absent. This appeal emanates from the judgment and order dated July 10, 2012 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the application made under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, inter alia, asking for injunction restraining the respondent from encashing or invoking the 2 bank guarantee that was ...
Rahul Maheshwari and Another Vs. Sheila Guha and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-10-2012
Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J. Premises no. 46, Park Street, Calcutta is comprised of one bigha of land having two storeyed building having a built up area of four thousand five hundred square feet as claimed by Mr. Roy Chowdhury appearing for Sheila Guha. Armenian Church was the owner of the said premises in question, now under the control and management of Official Trustee, West Bengal. In 1962, the Official Trustee executed a Deed of Lease in favour of one Dr. Mohini Mohan Ghosh for a period of twenty-one years. Dr. Ghosh was granted permission to sublet part of the premises for residential purpose with a rider that he would be obliged to occupy and reside in the said premises retaining major portion of it. The said lease executed on October 4, 1962 was renewed for a further term on the same terms and conditions. The renewed lease expired on February 6, 1985. Mr. Ghosh however, continued in possession. Official Trustee permitted him to retain possession as a monthly tenant on the same ter...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »