Kolkata Court September 2012 Judgments
Basudev Chauhanpetitioner Vs. Coal India Ltd.Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
ORDER SHEET WP No.1679 of 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE BASUDEV CHAUHAN Petitioner Versus COAL INDIA LTD.Respondent BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASHOKE KUMAR DASADHIKARI Date :25. h September, 2012. For Petitioner:Mr Subrata Ganguly, Advocate For Respondent: Mr.Vijoy Kumar, Advocate The Court : Mr.Ganguly, learned Counsel for the writ petitioner submits that the writ petitioner being the son of the deceased employee, who was a stone cutter, applied for employment in die-in-harness category. Mr.Ganguly submitted that the writ petitioner made this application after attaining majority and he was called for interview and further medical test was also held. He was declared fit but the respondent authorities without any reasonable cause refused employment to the writ petitioner on compassionate ground. Mr.Ganguly submitted that this is not a normal case and/or fresh selection. The writ petitioner made application for being appointed as succe...
Tag this Judgment!Abp Private Limited Vs. Media Research Users Council
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE PRESENT : THE HONBLE JUSTICE PATHERYA G.A.No.3966 of 2008 G.A.No.3729 of 2008 C.S.No.242 of 2008 ABP Private Limited versus Media Research Users Council FOR THE PLAINTIFF/ PETITIONER : Mr.Anindya Mitra, Sr.Adv.Mr.Tilak Bose, Adv.Mr.Anubhav Sinha, Adv.Mr.Soumitra Datta, Adv.FOR THE DEFENDANT/ RESPONDENT : Mr.Rajesh Mehta , Sr.Adv.Mr.Supriya Ranjan Saha, Adv.HEARD ON JUDGMENT ON :16.12.2009, 14.1.2009, 2.2.2009, 27.2.2009 & 30.3.2009. :25. h September, 2012. PATHERYA J. This is an application filed under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (1996 Act).The case of the defendant-applicant is that it is registered under the Companies Act, 1925. It was created by the useRs.for the users and of the useRs.The plaintiff is a member subscriber and a purchaser of its software which is published on the basis of the readership figures i.e.data based on Media research. Such data in the form of a softw...
Tag this Judgment!Goutam Banerjee Vs. Depak Banerjee and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
GA No.252 of 2012 CS No.100 of 2001 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Goutam Banerjee Versus Depak Banerjee & Others Before: The Honble Justice I.P.MUKERJ.Date:25. h September 2012 Appearance: Mr.Dipak Basu, Sr.Advocate for the petitioner This is another application in aid of the above partition and administration suit. On 21st May 2011 this Court passed an order directing the parties to maintain status quo with regard to the possession, nature, character of the property as on this date.The application of the plaintiff was disposed of. On 21st September 2011 this Court was concerned with another application made by the plaintiff. By an order made on that day the Court asked the fiRs.defendant and Ashtami Gayen to show cause by filing affidavits as to why the latter should not be evicted from the premises. The allegation against the latter was that the fiRs.defendant had wrongfully brought her into the premises. A copy of the application and the order wa...
Tag this Judgment!Rai Bahadur G.V. Swaika Estates Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. the Chief Commi ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
A.P.O.No.345 of 2011 W.P.No.2106 of 2003 W.P.No.128 of 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA In Appeal from its Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE PRESENT: The Honble JUSTICE KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND The Honble JUSTICE ASIM KUMAR MONDAL Rai Bahadur G.V.Swaika Estates PVT.LTD.& anr. versus The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata-II & ORS.Mr.K.Gooptoo, learned Advocate appears and submits Md.Nizamuddin, learned Advocate appears and submits Judgment on:25. 9.2012. K.J.Sengupta, J.:The instant appeal is against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge of this Court dated 29th March, 2011 by which two writ petitions being W.P.No.2106 of 2003 and W.P.No.128 of 2011 were dismissed. It appears from the records that writ petition being No.2106 of 2003 (hereinafter referred to the fiRs.writ) was filed to challenge the order dated 14th August, 2001 and also the sale notices punished on 8th October, 2003 and 12th October, 2003 in Sanmarg, Ananda Bazar Patrika and Statesman whe...
Tag this Judgment!Vs. Union of India and ors.Respo
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
W.P.No.743 OF 201.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side M/S.MEDICLUE RESEARCH DIAGNOSTICS PVT.LTD.& ANR. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.Petitioners Respondents BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DR. SAMBUDDHA CHAKRABARTI Date :25. h September, 2012. For the Petitioners : For the Respondents : THE COURT Mr.Ranajit Roy, Advocate Mr.Anil Gupta, Advocate : Let the affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept on records. This writ petition is directed against an order dated section 30th May, 2012 passed by the respondent No.4 under 7A of the Employees Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (in short, the Act).By the said order, the respondent No.4 after giving the petitioners an opportunity of being heard determined the dues payable by the petitioner No.1 to the tune of Rs.24,28,670/- which is inclusive of interests under section 7Q of the said Act. The petitioners grievance is that after passing this order, the respondent No.2 herein had issue...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. R.N.Lall and Bros. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction Original Side Present: The Honble Justice Sengupta And The Honble Justice Asim Kumar Mondal 25.09.2012 CUSTA 6 of 2012 GA 255.of 2012 M/S.R.N.Lall & Bros. versus Union of India & ORS.The Court :- Having heard Mr.Chowdhury and Mr.Bharadwaj we dispose of this application with the following order :We have gone through the impugned judgment and order of the learned Tribunal. It appears that the learned Tribunal has fixed the time limit within which the fiRs.authority is to conclude the hearing. This time limit is yet to expire. The learned Tribunal has observed by not granting interim relief on the question of jurisdiction. It appears to us the plea of jurisdiction is a mixed question of fact and law. We clarify this observation and finding of the learned Tribunal at the interlocutory stage will not be binding factor to decide on the question of jurisdiction, if it is raised in so many words in the reply to show cause. Under the circumstan...
Tag this Judgment!Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
Form not J.(2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Original Side Present : The Honble Justice Ashim Kumar Banerjee And The Honble Justice Shukla Kabir (Sinha) A.P.O.No.60 of 2012 A.P.No.331 of 2004 AFCONS INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL For the Appellant For the Respondent : : Mr.Mr.Mr.Mr.Jayanta Kumar Mitra, Senior Advocate Moloy Ghosh, Advocate Arijit Banerjee, Advocate Bijon Majumdar, Advocate Mr.Anindya Mitra, Advocate General Mr.Debangshu Basak, Advocate Heard on : August 30, September 4, 5,6,12 and 13, 2012. Judgment on : September 25, 2012. ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE.J.PREFACE : Disputes between the parties are ordinarily resolved through legal process. The parties are free to approach the Court of law for resolution of dispute. The parties would also be free to resolve their dispute in a domestic forum by adopting the process of alternate dispute resolution. Arbitration is one of the procedures that parties may avail, deciding to resolve the issu...
Tag this Judgment!…appellants/Petitioners Vs. Laxmi Pat Surana and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Original Side PRESENT: The Honble JUSTICE KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND The Honble JUSTICE ASIM KUMAR MONDAL APO No.148 of 2012 AP No.1095 of 2011P Pantaloon Retail India LTD.& ORS.appellants/petitioners versus Laxmi Pat Surana & ORS..respondents Mr.Jishnu Saha, learned Advocate appears and submits with Mr.Medora, learned Advocate Respondents appear and submit in person Judgment on:25. 9.2012. K.J.Sengupta, J.:This was an appeal against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 21st March, 2012 by which the learned Trial Judge has granted relief in favour of the respondent. The short fact of the case is as follows:- The respondent before us filed an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to the said Act) for the following interlocutory reliefs: a) The respondents be directed to show cause and/or adequate cause as to why they should not be directed to furnish se...
Tag this Judgment!Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
G.A.614 of 2012 G.A.613 of 2012 W.P.921 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side SHREE SHREE ISSWAR BENODE BEHARY & SHREE SHREE BINODESHWAR MAHADEVA & ANR. Versus KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.Petitioners Respondents BEFORE: The Hon'ble the CHIEF JUSTICE The Hon'ble JUSTICE DR. SAMBUDDHA CHAKRABARTI Date :25. h September, 2012. For the Petitioners : Mr.L.C.Bihani, Sr.Advocate with Ms.Amritaa Pandey and Ms.Anamika Pandey, Advocates For the Respondent/State : Mr.R.A.Agarwal, Advocate For Respondent No.13 : Mr.A.Lahiri, Advocate For Respondent/KMC : Mr.Achintya Banerjee wsith Mr.D.Mondal, Advocate For WB PCB : Mr.N.C.Bihani, Advocate THE December COURT 23 2011 : we By had our judgment dismissed a and writ order dated petition.We failed to detect any obvious public interest involved in the matter. The present Memorandum of Review has been filed by the petitioners seeking review of the said judgment and order on various grounds as contained ...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Super Forgings and Steels Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Settlement Commissio ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
WP No.626 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION M/S SUPER FORGINGS & STEELS LTD.Versus INCOME TAX SETTLEMENT COMMISSION ( IT & WT) & ANR BEFORE: The HON'BLE JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE DATE : SEPTEMBER 25 2012. Appearance: Ms.Dyuti Ray, Adv.The Court: This writ application is directed against an order dated July 2, 2012 passed by the Income Tax Settlement Commission constituted under Section 245B of the Income Tax Act 1961, whereby the petitioner was required to pay an amount of rupees fifty lakhs by July 7, 2012 and furnish proof of payment thereof to the Secretary, Settlement Commission and to pay the balance amount including interest in 36 equal monthly instalments. The grounds on which the order impugned has been challenged have been pleaded in paragraph 22 of the writ petition and the various sub-paragraphs thereunder. The purported grounds are totally vague, devoid of particulars and no grounds in law for setting aside a settlement made by the Settlem...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »