Kolkata Court August 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.
Vs. State of West Bengalres
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
ORDER SHEET WP No.604 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE VIJAY KUMAR TIWARI Petitioner Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL Respondent BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA Date :3. d August, 2012. Appearance : Mr.Subir Sanyal,Advocate. Mr.Sakti Pada Jana, Advocate. Mr.Subhrangshu Panda, Advocate. for the petitioner Mr.Ram Anand Agarwal, Advocate. Mr.Somnath Banerjee, Advocate.for the State The Court : Since the concerned District Inspector of Schools ( Secondary Education ) refused to approve the service of the petitioner in the vacancy created on the retirement of one Gajendra Prasad, a clerk in Marwari Balika Vidyalaya, the petitioner earlier came before this Court with a writ petition, being WP No.830 of 2011, which was disposed of by this Court on 29th of November, 2011 by directing the concerned District Inspector Schools ( Secondary Education ) to consider the schools proposal for approving the appointment of the petitioner ...
C.i.T. Kolkata I Vs. M/S. Ispat Industries Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction [Income Tax].ORIGINAL SIDE ITA No.398 of 2005 C.I.T.KOLKATA I Versus M/S.ISPAT INDUSTRIES LTD.Smt.A.Ghutghutia, Advocate for the Revenue Mr.J.P. Khaitan, Senior Advocate with Mr.S.Das, Advocate for the Respondent. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA And The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASIM KUMAR MONDAL Date :3. d August, 2012. The Court : This appeal is sought to be preferred against judgment and order of the learned Tribunal dated 11th May, 2005 in relation to assessment year 2000-01 on the following suggested questions of law: i].Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned Tribunal has erred in holding that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals].is justified in directing the assessing officer to allow the interest on self assessment tax at the admissible rate from the date of payment of the tax upto the date of refund. ii].Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned Trib...
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
1 ORDER SHEET ACO No.166 of 2012 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 -AndASHIM KUMAR DUTTA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE SHUKLA KABIR (SINHA) Date :3. d August, 2012. Appearance: Mr.Ratnanko Banerjee, Advocate For the applicant. Mr.Mainak Bose, Advocate For the appellant. Ms.Smita Das Dey, Advocate For the Official Liquidator. The Court :- This application is again a ploy to forestall and, if not possible, to delay the sale of the assets of the Company ( In Liquidation).M/S.Natabar Dutta Properties Pvt Ltd (In Liquidation) is basically a property company. The Official Liquidator is supposed to be in possession of all the assets. With great difficulty, the learned Single Judge put up these properties for sale that litigation one after another. gave rise to protracted The appellant approached us with ...
Magma Fincorp Ltd. Vs. Akshar Roadlines and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
AP No.193 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE MAGMA FINCORP LTD.Versus AKSHAR ROADLINES & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :3. d August, 2012. Appearance: Mr.Samrat Sen, Adv.The Court : The respondents are not represented. The respondents have not been represented at any stage despite previous notice. A Receiver was appointed to collect the moneys due to the fiRs.respondent from four organizations named at paragraph 30 of the petition. The Receiver reports that two of the organizations have indicated that nothing is due and payable by them to the fiRs.respondent. The two other organizations have admitted that money is due from them to the fiRs.respondent, but despite the Receivers request, such money has not been deposited with the Receiver. The Receiver has also opened a bank account for the purpose. The order of injunction restraining the four entities named at paragraph 30 of the petition is confirmed and such...
Official Liquidator Vs. Deepak Chandra and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
ORDER SHEET CA NO.547 OF 201.CP NO.533 OF 199.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF : QUALITY PHARMACEUTICALS & LTD.(IN LIQN.) AND OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR versus DEEPAK CHANDRA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :3. d August, 2012. Appearance: Mr.D.K.Singh, Advocate Mr.Ronojit Choudhury, Advocate The Court : CA No.547 of 2012 is an application by the eighth respondent in the misfeasance proceedings seeking to be discharged. The application is in the nature of demurrer and it is suggested on behalf of the applicant that even if the allegations levelled in the misfeasance application being CA no.350 of 2003 were taken at face value and assumed to be correct, no decree can be passed against the applicant. The applicant refers to the points of claim filed under section 543 of the Companies Act on behalf of the Official Liquidator and what the applicant claims to be the general nature of the allegations which are not, according to...
Besco Limited Vs. P.K. Bagla and Company
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
ORDER SHEET CA NO.545 OF 201.WITH CP NO.386 OF 200.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE BESCO LIMITED Versus P.K.BAGLA & COMPANY BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date :3. d August, 2012. Mr.R.Mitra, Mr.S.K.Kunduappear. Mr.M.GuptaappeaRs.The Court : Further to my order dated 2nd May, 2012, the Assistant Registrar [Company].appointed Nawal Garia & Co., Chartered Accountant, from the panel of the Court to determine the exact amount due and payable by the company to the petitioning creditor. It was explicit in the order dated 2nd May, 2012 that the calculation made by the Chartered Accountant from the panel of this Court would be final. The Chartered Accountant has made a report dated 18th May, 2012, which says that a sum of Rs.8,51,464/- is due and payable by the Company in terms of the existing orders of this Court, to the petitioning creditor till 2nd May, 2012. Now, the learned advocate for the company turns around and tries to raise various disputes,...
Commissioner of Custom(Port),calcutta Vs. M/S. Narayan Vegetable Indus ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction [Customs].ORIGINAL SIDE CUSTA No.5 of 2002 With CUSTA No.11 of 2001 COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOM(PORT),CALCUTTA Versus M/S.NARAYAN VEGETABLE INDUSTRIES(P) LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA A n d The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASIM KUMAR MONDAL Date :3. d August, 2012. The Court : In terms of our earlier order dated 20th July, 2012, an affidavit has been filed, and it appears that the report of the department is not correct. CUSTA No.11 of 2001 has not been disposed of, rather an order was passed by Their Lordships [ Y.R.Meena, J. & Arun Kumar Mitra, J., as Their Lordships then were].on 13th July, 2001 whereby direction was given upon the department to refer the matter to this Court on formulated questions of law. In compliance of the said order, reference has also been made, and the CUSTA No.5 of 2002 is a matter in connection with the CUSTA No.11 of 2001. Therefore, we direct the department of this Court to take note of...
The Tinplate Company of India Ltd. Vs. Owners and Parties Interested i ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
Order Sheet GA No.4111 of 2008 GA No.1486 of 2012 AS No.3 of 1996 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE THE TINPLATE COMPANY OF INDIA LTD.Versus OWNERS AND PARTIES INTERESTED IN THE OCEAN VESSEL "ESPERANZA-III. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE MAHARAJ SINHA Date:3. August 2012 & 6 August 2012 (Judgment was dictated in court on both the dates.) Appearance: Mr.Pradip Ghosh, Sr.Adv.Mr.Debdutta Sen, Adv.Mr.Maloy Seal, Adv.for the Plaintiff. Mr.Goutam Chakraborty, Sr.Adv.Mr.Partha Basu, Adv.Mr.Sudhakar Prasad, Adv.for the Defendants. On 8 February 1996, the plaintiff, The Tinplate Company of India Limited instituted the suit making the following claims:a) Arrest of the said Ocean Vessel ESPERANZA III, her tackles, apparels and furniture; b) Injunction restraining said Vessel Ocean the ESPERANZA defendants III from and/or the leaving the Sandheads or the jurisdiction of this Honble Court without discharging the cargo of the plaintiff covered by the said Bill of Lading...
Vs. State of West Bengal and Othersres
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-03-2012
ORDER SHEET WP No.603 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE Sr.DASUDEB GHOSH Petitioner Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS Respondents BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA Date :3. d August, 2012. Appearance : Mr.Subir Sanyal,Advocate. Mr.Sakti Pada Jana, Advocate. Mr.Subhrangshu Panda, Advocate. for the petitioner Mr.Sadananda Ganguly,Advocate. Ms.Reshmi Ghosh, Advocate.for the State The Court : Since the concerned District Inspector of Schools ( Secondary Education ) refused to approve the service of the petitioner in the vacancy created on the retirement of one Kaushalya Devi, an approved Group-D staff in Marwari Balika Vidyalaya, the petitioner earlier came before this Court with a writ petition, being WP No.831 of 2011, which was disposed of by this Court on 22nd November, 2011 by directing the concerned District Inspector of Schools ( Secondary Education ) to consider the schools proposal for approving the appointm...
Sarit Chakraborty Vs. West Bengal University of Techonology and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-02-2012
Girish Chandra Gupta, J. Rule 3.4(a) laid down in the Information Brochure JEM-2012, issued by the West Bengal Joint Entrance Examination Board, provides as follows:- “For all the courses except B. Arch, Marine Engineering and B. Pharmacy: General candidates must pass H.S. (10+2) or its equivalent examination with a minimum of 45% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics taken together (40% for SC/ST candidates) and with at least 30% marks in English (for all category of candidates) with individual pass marks in Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics, English and vernacular (for any other fifth subject).” It is not in dispute that the writ petitioner is a general category candidate and he obtained 44.6% marks in aggregate in the Science group. It is also an admitted fact that his rank in the engineering stream is 1905. The question which arises for determination is whether applying the principle of rounding off the petitioner can be deemed to have obtained the minimum 45% marks...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »