Kolkata Court August 2012 Judgments
Sachchidananda Banerjee Vs. Moly Gupta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-28-2012
ORDER SHEET APOT NO.344 OF 201.GA NO.1890 OF 201.CS NO.643 OF 199.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SACHCHIDANANDA BANERJEE Versus MOLY GUPTA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SENGUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASIM KUMAR MONDAL Date :28. h August, 2012. The Court : There will be an order in terms of prayer(a).By consent of the parties and dispensing with all the formalities we dispose of the appeal treating it as on days list and the application. We feel that the appeal of this nature does not require final hearing with formality. This appeal is directed against the order of the learned Trial Judge who set aside the decree passed ex parte. The decree was set aside by the learned Trial Judge at a stage when the decree was fully implemented. It was a suit for specific performance and conveyance was registered and executed and entire consideration money in terms of the agreement was lying deposited with the Registrar, Original side. Long after passing of ...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Deepak Khemkapetitioner Vs. the K.M.C.and Orsrespondents
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-28-2012
ORDER SHEET WP No.424 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE Sr.DEEPAK KHEMKA Versus THE K.M.C.& ORS Petitioner Respondents BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA Date :28. h August, 2012. Appearance : Mr.K.K. Maity, Advocate, Mr.P.Bishal, Advocate.for the petitioner Mr.Sushovan Sengupta, Advocate. Mr.Sirsanya Bandopadhyay, Advocate.for the respdt. Nos.1 to 3. Mr.Sandip Roy Chowdhury,Advocate. Mr.Madhumita Patra, Advocate. for the respdt. No.5 Ms.Sipra Majumdar, Advocate. for the State. The Court : today Let the affidavit-in-opposition filed in Court on behalf of the respondent Nos.6 and 7 be kept with the record. Having regard to the order of ad-interim injunction passed by the learned Judge, 10th Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta, on 6th June, 2012 in Title Suit No.813 of 2012 whereby status quo in respect of water supply at Premises No.21A, Madan Mohan Tala Street, Kolkata, was directed to be maintained, this Court is of ...
Tag this Judgment!Raj Shekhar Agrawal and anr. Vs. M/S. Pratati 47 Development Ltd. and
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-28-2012
APO No.342 of 2012 ACO No.179 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE RAJ SHEKHAR AGRAWAL & ANR. -VersusM/S.PRATATI 4 DEVELOPMENT LTD.& ORS.Appearance: Mr.Utpal Bose, Adv...for the appellant. Mr.Ranjan Deb, Sr.Adv.Mr.Chandranath Mukherjee, Adv...for the respondent No.15. Mr.D.Basak, Adv.Mr.Manot Tiwari, Adv...for the respondent No.16. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : August 28, 2012. The Court : The appellants are aggrieved by the Company Law Board rejecting the appellants prayer for abandoning certain reliefs made in a petition under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956. The appellants are also aggrieved by the Company Law Board declining to grant leave to the appellants to institute a fresh suit in respect of the matters covered by the reliefs which were to be abandoned. It is not necessary to assess whether any legal issue of any importance arises under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 since the respondents ...
Tag this Judgment!Again, in the Case of Jagdish Prasad Vs. State of
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-28-2012
W.P.350 OF 201.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side PRASENJIT DAS Versus COAL INDIA LTD.& ORS.Petitioner Respondents BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DR. SAMBUDDHA CHAKRABARTI Date :28. h August, 2012. For the Petitioner : Mr.Partha Chakraborty, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr.K.Mondal, Advocate THE COURT : This Writ petition is directed against the alleged non-consideration of representation made by the petitioner for his employment on compassionate ground after the death of his father who was an employee under the respondent No.1. The father of the petitioner died in the year 1994. The petitioner was then a minot and, according to him, he had crossed 15 yeaRs.The application employment mother in for of the year her son the petitioner 1995 when he had filed seeking an would attain an alternative majority. According to his mother as also the case of the petitioner, he had attained majority in July, 1997. The application petitioner, however, within t...
Tag this Judgment!Priyanka Tibrewala Vs. Shri Kashi Prasad Bajaj and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-28-2012
ORDER SHEET GA No.2224 of 2012 CS No.225 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE PRIYANKA TIBREWALA Versus SHRI KASHI PRASAD BAJAJ & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date:28. h August, 2012 Appearance Mr.Aryak Dutta, Adv.with Mr.Ritzu Ghosal, Adv.Mr.S.Mitra,d Adv.Mr.K.K. Thakkar, Adv.with Mr.Anuj Singh, Adv.This is an application in aid of a suit by the widow of one Kunal Bajaj. She sues for herself and for the minot daughter born to her and Kunal Bajaj, Kaavya Bajaj. The couple was married in March, 2008. They went to Dubai shortly thereafter where the husband was working with HSBC, a banking company. On 7th February, 2012, Kunal Bajaj died. His body was brought to Kolkata and cremated on 13th February, 2012. It seems that the father of the husband, Kashi Prasad Bajaj applied before a Court in Dubai for declaration of rights as to succession and for custody of the minot daughter. On 25th March, 2012, that Court passed an order...
Tag this Judgment!Anr. Vs. Jatia Cotton Mills Limited and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-28-2012
APO No.310 of 2012 ACO No.165 of 2012 CA No.359 of 2012 CP No.64 of 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE VENKATESHWAR VANIJYA INDIA LTD.& ANR. -VersusJATIA COTTON MILLS LIMITED & ORS.Appearance: Mr.Pratap Chatterjee, Sr.Adv.Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Adv.Mr.Ritobrata Mitra, Adv.Mr.Rudrajit Sarkar, Adv.Prasanta Naskar, Adv.Mr.D.Choudhury, Adv.Mr.S.Choudhury, Adv..for the appellants. Mr.P.C. Sen, Sr.Adv...for the respondent no.3. Mr.Utpal Bose, Adv.Mr.Aniruddha Roy, Adv.Mr.Ratnesh Kr. Rai, Adv.Mr.Anunot Basu, Adv...for the respondent nos.6 to 8. Mr.Joydeep Kar, Adv...for the respondent No.2. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : August 28, 2012. The Court : Two serious questions of law have been raised in this appeal from an order, in effect, allowing a settlement of the disputes arising out of petitions filed, inter alia, under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956. The appellants say that since the name of the concerned company ha...
Tag this Judgment!Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-28-2012
CP No.77 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction IN THE MATTER OF : FORTUNE FURNITECH PRIVATE LIMITED -ANDHDFC BANK LIMITED Appearance Mr.D.Basak, Advocate BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :28. h August, 2012. The Court : None appears on behalf of the company even at the second call. A copy of an affidavit-in-opposition has apparently been served on the petitioner but none appears to have been filed in Court. The claim of the unsecured petitioning creditor is on account of monies lent and advanced to a company which has not merged in the company which is the subject-matter of the present petition. The credit facilities were accorded to the company and the company appears not to have repaid the amount. The statutory notice was issued on behalf of the petitioning creditor on November 19, 2011, claiming that the petitioner had agreed to lend and advance a sum of Rs.1.40 crore as term loan as per the terms and conditions of the letter of sanction. The st...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammed Iqbal Ahmed Vs. Mohammed Pervez and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-28-2012
ORDER SHEET GA No.1309 of 2012 With CS No.22 of 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE In the matter of: MOHAMMED IQBAL AHMED Versus MOHAMMED PERVEZ & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASIM KUMAR RAY Date :28. h August, 2012. Appearance: Mr.Swarnendu Ghosh, Adv..for the plaintiff. Mr.Sabyasachi Chowdhury, Adv.Mr.Rupok Ghosh, Adv.Ms.A.Poddar, Adv..for the defendant no.4 Mr.Shaunak Mitra, Adv..for the defendant no.5. The Court: Learned Counsel appearing for the plaintiff, defendant no.4 and defendant no.5 are before the Court. Plaintiff, client of Mr.Swarnendu Ghosh learned Counsel has taken out GA No.1309 of 2012 praying for expeditious disposal of this suit being CS No.22 of 2005. Mr.Chowdhury learned Counsel appearing for the defendant no.4 submits that the application may be dismissed summarily. Learned Counsel appearing for the defendant no.5 submits that his client has not been served with summons. In this background, Mr.Ghosh learned Co...
Tag this Judgment!Greaves Cotton Ltd. Vs. M/S. New India Transport Co. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-28-2012
CS 39.of 1999 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL SIDE GREAVES COTTON LTD.VERSUS M/S.NEW INDIA TRANSPORT Co.& ANR. BEFORE : THE HONBLE JUSTICE MURARI PRASAD SHRIVASTAVA DATE :28. H AUGUST, 2012. For the plaintiff : Ms.Madhurima Mukherjee,Advocate The Court :- The present suit has been filed praying for a decree for specific delivery of goods, particulars whereof being mentioned in Schedules B and B 1 to the plaint and alternatively a decree for a sum of Rs.17,71,893.73 P. being the value of the said goods along with interest and costs. The plaintiffs case in brief is that it is engaged in manufacturing spare parts of generator sets and defendant No.1 is the common carrier while defendant No.2 was engaged as clearing and forwarding agent of the plaintiff for transporting the spare parts of the generating sets to various customers of the plaintiff. Defendant No.2 was engaged by the plaintiff upon terms and conditions which were mutually agreed upon between defendant Nos.1 and 2. Betwe...
Tag this Judgment!Shiva Glass Works Co. Ltd...Petitioner Vs. the State of West Bengal an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-28-2012
1 ORDER SHEET G.A.No.2288 of 2012 W.P.No.429 of 2006 G.A.No.2320 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SHIVA GLASS WORKS Co.LTD.Petitioner .Respondents Versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date :28. h August, 2012. Mr.Subir Sanyal, Advocate, Mr.Suthirtha Das, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr.Srijib Chakraborty, Advocate for the State Mr.R.N.Jhunjhunwala, Advocate, Mr.Jiban Ballav Panda, Advocate, Mr.Ram Chandra Guchhait, Advocate, Mr.Rishav Dutta, Advocate for CESC LTD.The Court : The only reason given for setting aside the order dated 18th February, 2010 and condoning the delay of 915 days is that the matter went unnoticed by the Advocates for the petitioner. It is true that no explanation has been given for not appearance. All that has been said is that in April, 2012 the petitioners Director while making a search in the internet came to knot of the dismissal order. Therefore, it is apparent that there...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »