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.
M/S. Paresh Nath Datta Vs. Birbhum Institute of Engineering and Techno ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-23-2012
AP No.449 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.PARESH NATH DATTA Versus BIRBHUM INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY Appearance Mr.N.R.Mukherjee, Advocate Mr.Goutam Dey, Advocate Mr.Hiranmay Bhattacharya, Advocate Mr.Tanmay Mukherjee, Advocate BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :23. d August , 2012. The Court : The request under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is not maintainable since the alleged arbitration agreement has not been invoked at all. In the context of the conduct of the petitioner herein, it is also not necessary to make a conclusive pronouncement on whether there is an arbitration agreement between the parties. It is not in dispute that there is no arbitration clause contained in any written agreement between the parties. In couRs.of one of the letters addressed by the petitioner to the respondent on October 12, 2011, the petitioner contended that if the claims of the petition...
Uttarayan Tenants' Welfare Association and Ors. vs. Anupam Saraogi and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-23-2012
ORDER SHEET GA No.2177 of 2012 CS No.123 of 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE UTTARAYAN TENANTS' WELFARE ASSOCIATION & ORS.Versus ANUPAM SARAOGI & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date :23. d August, 2012. Appearance: Mr.Sakya Sen, Advocate Mr.P.Saha, Advocate Mr.Sunil Singhaniya, Advocate for the plaintiffs Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Advocate Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury, Advocate Mr.Sudhakar Prasad, Advocate For the defendants The Court: The report of the Special Officer is taken on record. The controversies between the parties raised in this application may be appropriately gone into after filing of affidavits. Let affidavits be exchanged according to the following directions :Affidavit in opposition is to be filed by 6th September, 2012. List this application on 19th September, 2012. Affidavit in reply may be filed in the meantime. Now, the question of passing an interim order. The bone of contention seems to be the action of the Special...
Ms. Meharia Reliance Upon the Decision of State of Madras Vs. Madurai
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-23-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side Present: The Honble Justice Debasish Kar Gupta C.C.No.209 of 2010 GA No.1503 of 2012 M/S.Tetulia Coke Plant(P) LTD.& ORS.versus P.S.Bhattacharya For Petitioners : Ms.Vineeta Meharia, Mr.Pijush Meharia. For Contemnors : Mr.Mr.Mr.Mr.Mr.Judgment On : Shaktinath Mukherjee, Sr.Adv.Kalimnddin Mondal, Nikhil Ray, Aniruddha Mitra, Partha Basu, 23-08-2012. This is a rule issued under Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for alleged wilful disobedience of the Judgment dated March 25, 2010 passed in the matter of M/S.Tetulia Coke Plant(P) Ltd ( in re. W.P.No.1279 of 2005).By virtue of the aforesaid Judgment the Eastern Coal Field LTD.was directed to refund the price of the coal paid in excess of notified price under e. Auction Scheme. The operative portion of the above Judgment are quoted below: It may be pointed out that by virtue of the order dated August 8, 2005 passed in this writ application, the applicants/writ petitioners...
Cotton County Retail Ltd. Vs. Vinita Garments and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-23-2012
AP No.411 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE COTTON COUNTY RETAIL LTD.Versus VINITA GARMENTS & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :23. d August, 2012. Appearance: Mr.Anirban Roy, Adv.Mr.Amitava Das, Adv.The Court : The petitioner has sought the termination of the mandate of the arbitrator appointed by the Chief Justice of this Court or his designate on the ground that the arbitrator has acted in derogation of the agreement between the parties that provides for the venue of the arbitration to be in Ludhiana. The arbitrator was appointed by an order of May 14, 2010 and his remuneration of 300 GM was fixed and the parties directed to share the same. The parties say that they have proceeded on the basis of the daily remuneration of the arbitrator being 300 GM. The arbitration agreement between the parties is contained in Clause 12 of the agreement of September 9, 2008: All disputes, differences and claims arising out o...
Smt. Narayani Debi Dhanania @ Agarwal and ors. Vs. Smt. Narayani Devi ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-23-2012
ORDER SHEET GA No.1693 of 2012 With CS No.148 of 2002 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE In the matter of: SMT. NARAYANI DEBI DHANANIA @ AGARWAL & ORS.Versus SMT. NARAYANI DEVI AGARWALLA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASIM KUMAR RAY Date :23. d August, 2012. Appearance: Mr.Srenik Singhvi, Adv.Ms.Setu Das Roy, Adv..for the petitoner. Mr.Asish Chakraborty Adv..for the plaintiff no.3. Mr.Bidyut Dutt, Adv..for the plaintiffs except plaintiff nos.3 & 7. Mr.Tapas Banerjee, Adv.Mr.Sambhu Nath Dutta, Adv..for the defendant nos.2A to 2F. Mr.K.L.Yadav, Adv..for the defendant no.4. The Court: Mr.Singhvi, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the petitioner has purchased the share of defendant nos.5 and 7 and as such there is no scope for filing affidavit of the other defendants. Mr.Tapas Banerjee, learned Advocate appearing for the defendant nos.2(a) to 2(f) and Mr.Asish Chakraborty learned Advocate appearing for the p...
Debasish Podder and Others Vs. the State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-22-2012
Tapen Sen, J. 1. This Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 30.7.2008 and 31.7.2008 passed by Sri Arup Basu, Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 5, Barrackpore, North 24 Parganas in Sessions Trial No. 04(09)/07 arising out of Sessions Case No. 04 (07) (07) whereby and whereunder the Appellants were convicted under Sections 498A and 304B of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years with fine of Rs. 5,000/- for each and in default, to suffer further R.I. for three more months under Section 498A and rigorous imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 304B IPC. It was further directed that 50% of the fine amount was to be paid to the Complainant by way of compensation under Section 357 Cr. P.C. 2. On 1.8.2006, one Smt. Malati Saha, wife of Kanai Saha made a written report before the Officer-in-charge, Bizpur police station, North 24 Parganas in relation to an occurrence said to have taken place on the same da...
Hindusthan Pilkington Glass Works Ltd. (In Liquidation) and Wellworth ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-22-2012
Ashim Kumar Banerjee. J. Hindusthan Pilkington Glass Works Ltd. was a company having its factory on a land comprising of 56.486 cottahs on both sides of the G.T. Road at Asansol. From the report submitted by the State through Additional District Magistrate appearing at pages 315-319 of the paper book, following facts would reveal : i) Hindustan Pilkington was constituted in the year 1951. The said company acquired land through State Government in the Mouza- Asansol and Kalipahari. Total land would be 54.45 acres, however as per the record of the Official Liqudiator it was 56.456 acres. ii) The factory was functional up to May 25, 1980 when the company declared lock out, since then the company was closed. iii) On an application for winding up being C.P. 435 of 1985 this Court passed an order of winding up on February 28, 1986, coupled with a direction on the Official Liquidator to take possession of the assets and ultimately put up the assets for sale. There had been protracted litigati...
Babu Paul Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-22-2012
Murari Prasad Shrivastava, J. The present appeal is directed against the order of conviction and sentence dated 29.01.2007 and 31.01.2007 respectively passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Krishnagar, Dist.- Nadia, in Sessions Case No. 112 (3) 05 relating to Sessions Trial No. iii of 2006 under Section 376 (1) I.P.C whereby the appellant was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 5 months, the learned Court further ordering that the said amount of fine, if paid, shall go to the de facto complainant-cum- victim, after deducting the expenses therefrom for sending the amount by money order. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 11.10.2004 at about 7 p.m when the de facto complainant was working on the weaving machine in the house of one Ajit Ghosh, the accused Babu Pal, who used to work on another weaving machine in an adjacent premises, suddenly came from behind and gag...
Manjoor Alam Vs. Employeesand#8217; State Insurance Corporation
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-21-2012
Prasenjit Mandal, J. This application is at the instance of the appellant and is directed against the judgment and order dated September 29, 2004 passed by the learned Judge, Employees’ Insurance Court, West Bengal in Appeal No.17 of 2012. The petitioner instituted the aforesaid appeal against the decision of the Medical Board which assessed the loss of earning capacity of the appellant/petitioner herein at 5 per cent in respect of the employment injury sustained by him on January 28, 2000. The petitioner was not satisfied with such quantum of injury as assessed by the Medical Board and so, the appeal was filed. While disposing of the appeal, the Employees’ Insurance Court allowed the appeal in part raising the extent of loss of earning capacity from 5 per cent to 7 per cent. The petitioner was not satisfied with such judgment and order of the Appellate Court and according to him, he should get at least 30 per cent of the loss of earning capacity. So, this application has b...
Haradhan Bhattacharjee Vs. State Bank of India and Another
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-17-2012
Tapen Sen, J. This Writ Petition is directed against the charge-sheet dated 23.11.2004 issued by the Assistant General Manager, State Bank of India (Respondent No. 3) initiating Departmental proceedings against the Petitioner. The Writ Petition also seeks to challenge the Report of the Inquiry Officer as well as the Order of dismissal passed on 8.3.2007 (Annexure-P/22) and the Order passed on 31.5.2007 by the Deputy General Manager (Respondent No. 2) (see pages 168 to 170) confirming the Order of punishment and rejecting the Appeal. 2. It is apparent from the documents brought on record that the Petitioner, while posted in the Bill Section of N.S. Road Branch, Kolkata committed certain irregularities and the gist of the same, as taken from the charge-sheet, are as follows :- i) He opened a CA A/c No. 1554 on 1.7.1988 at the Corporation Bank, Dharamtala Street, Kolkata in the name of M/s. United Engineering Company. While opening the said account he put his signature as HP Singha, the P...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »