Kolkata Court January 2013 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.
Coal India Limited Vs. Gajraj Chemicals
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-17-2013
CS No.50 of 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE COAL INDIA LIMITED Versus GAJRAJ CHEMICALS BEFORE : The Honble JUSTICE MURARI PRASAD SHRIVASTAVA Date:17. 01.2013 Appearance: Mr.Aniruddha Mitra, Advocate led by Mr.Pradip Kr. Dutt, Sr.Advocate for the Plaintiff The Court:The present suit has been filed by the plaintiff praying for a decree for declaration that the contract entered into between the plaintiff and defendant is valid for a period of one year with effect from 28th July, 2006 and defendant is obliged to continue the supply of explosives uninterruptedly for the entire period of the said contract and for other consequential reliefs. The plaintiffs case in brief is that in the ordinary couRs.of business, plaintiff requires regular supply of explosives for the purpose of blasting operations for facilitating coal production. On 2nd May, 2006 the Deputy Chief Material Manager of the plaintiff issued a notice inviting offers from Indi...
Abhishek Bagaria Vs. Sushil Kumar Bagaria and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-17-2013
ORDER SHEET CS No.265 of 1992 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ABHISHEK BAGARIA Versus SUSHIL KUMAR BAGARIA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE MURARI PRASAD SHRIVASTAVA Date :17. h January, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Ganesh Prasad Shaw, Adv.For the Plaintiff. Mr.Amitava Das, Adv.Ms.Rajlakshmi De, Adv.For the Dvefendant No.1. Mr.S.K.Poddar, Adv.For the Defendant No.2 & 3 Mr.Sharma, Adv.For the Receiver. The Court :- Learned Advocates for the parties are present. Seen the report of the learned Receiver. It is submitted that the learned Receiver may be permitted to sell the scrap materials lying at the Cinema Hall as referred to by him in paragraph 20(a) of the report and the sale proceeds be utilized for payment of the gratuity in respect of three superannuated employees as stated therein and also parties may be given liberty to sit with the learned Receiver for utilization of the vacant areas of the premises as mentioned in Clause (d) of paragrap...
Srei Equipment Finance Private Limited Vs. Kaushal Singh Thakur and an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-2013
AP No.979 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED Versus KAUSHAL SINGH THAKUR & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :16. h January, 2013. Mr.Satarup Banerjee, Adv.appears The Court : The respondents are not represented despite previous service. The petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been made for sale of two back-hoe loaders that were directed to be sold by an order of September 26, 2012. The highest offerer has backed out. The two cheques for Rs.10,000/- each made over in favour of the Receiver have remained unencashed and were with the petitioner for a considerable period of time. Unless the petitioner is able to obtain a sum of Rs.20,000/- from the erstwhile offerer, G.S.Earth MoveRs.the petitioners ultimate claim will stand reduced by Rs.20,000/- with interest thereon at the ultimate rate that may be awarded in favour of the petitioner from September 2...
Dibakar Banik @ Divakar Banik Vs. the Kolkata Municipal Corporation an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-2013
ORDER SHEET WP NO.912 OF 201.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE DIBAKAR BANIK @ DIVAKAR BANIK Versus THE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND OTHERS BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE JAYANTA KUMAR BISWAS Date :16. h January, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Gautam Chakraborty, Mr.Sanjib Das, Advocates for petitioner Mr.Biswajait Mukherjee, Mr.Subhrangshu Panda, Advocates for KMC Mr.Arindam Banerjee, Ms.Hashnuhana Chakraborty, Mr.Vinay Kr.Purohit, Advocates for Respondent nos.11 & 15 Mr.Rahul Karmakar, Advocate for respondent No.10 & 14 Ms.Sipra Mazumder, Ms.Susmita Biswas Chowdhury, Advocates for State The Court : The petitioner in this WP under art.226 of the Constitution of India dated October 10, 2012 is seeking the following principal reliefs:- a) A writ of or order in the nature of mandamus do issue directing the respondent Municipal Authorities to set aside and/or cancel the reconstruction plan No.10/BR/V/2011 dated 13.06.2011 issued by the Kolkata Municipal ...
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-2013
ACO No.261 of 2012 APOT No.592 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION IN THE MATTER OF: RAVINDRA KUMAR MORE & ORS.AND BEHAR COLD STORAGE PVT.LTD & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :16. h January, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Adv.Mr.J.Chowdhury, Adv.Mr.S.K. Tiwari, Adv..for the appellants. Mr.Ratnanko Banerji, Adv.Ms.Ranjabati Sen, Adv.Mr.S.Chowdhury, Adv.Mr.S.Saha, Adv..for the respondent nos.1-3 Mr.Ritobrata Mitra, Adv..for the respondent no.4 & 5 Mr.Debangsu Basak, Adv.Mr.Satarup Banerjee, Adv.Mr.R.Upadhyay, Adv..for the respondent no.8 The Court : The appeal under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 arises out of the refusal by the Company Law Board to pass an interim order on an interlocutory application in proceedings under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956. 2 It is the case of the appellants that despite it being brought to the notice of the Company Law Board that the only asset of the company had been alienated an...
Gurmukh Lakhmani Vs. the Official Liquidator
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CA No.645 of 2012 CP No.112 of 2010 IN THE MATTER OF: SAMRATH AGENTS PRIVATE LTD.(IN LIQUIDATION) -ANDGURMUKH LAKHMANI -VSTHE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR AND CA No.13 of 2013 CP No.112 of 2010 SAMRATH AGENTS PRIVATE LTD.AND RAJESH PIROGIWAL -VSTHE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR, HIGH COURT, CALCUTTA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :16. h January, 2013. Appearance: Mr.D.Basak, Adv.Mr.D.N. Chowdhury, Adv.Ms.Manju Bhuteria, Adv.Ms.Ruma Sikdar, Adv.The Court : CA No.13 of 2013 is an application by a contributory of the company in liquidation who claims to have held the entirety of the shareholding in the company prior to its liquidation whether through relatives or friends or entities under the control of such contributory or his relatives or friends. The contributory says that the company was engaged in the business of financing and was a registered non-banking financial company. The winding-up petition was admitted on February 6, 2012 whe...
Vs. Union of India and anr.Respo
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-2013
ORDER SHEET W.P.No.967 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SUBRATA GUHASARKER & ANR. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Petitioners Respondents BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE Date :16. h January, 2013. For Petitioners : Mr.R.K.Chowdhary with Mr.A.K.Chowdhary, Adversus For Respondents : Mr.R.Bharadwaj with Mr.T.M.Siddiqui, Adversus This writ application is directed against an order being CHA Order No.07/2012 dated 16/21st August, 2012 whereby the Commissioner of Customs [Airport and Administration].has in exercise of power conferred on him under Regulation 20(2) of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulation, 2004, hereinafter referred to as the 2004 CHALR, suspended operation of the Customs House Agents license not S-114, held by M/s.S.Guha Sarkar and Company, with immediate effect. From the order impugned, it appears that M/s.S.Guha Sarkar and Company of Village Chandrapur under Digha Post Office area in 24 Parganas [North].is ...
M/S. Bagri Impex Private Limited Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-2013
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction [Income Tax].ORIGINAL SIDE GA No.3302 of 2012 ITAT No.277 of 2012 M/S.BAGRI IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED Versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-9, KOLKATA & ORS BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE TARUN KUMAR DAS Date :16. h January, 2013. For Appellant For Respondent : Mr.R.Bharadwaj, Advocate : Mr.P.Dudhuria, Advocate The Court : The undisputed facts of the case are as follows: The assessee was owner of 2/5th share in a land situate at 14A, Burdwan Road, Kolkata. Naturally, there were co-owners owning the residuary the right in the land in question. The co-owners were the group companies. The case of the assessee is that the land in question or the interest of the assessee was agreed to be sold on 15th October, 1996 to 15 several buyeRs.Deeds of conveyance in favour of five buyers were executed on 15.1.1998. The balance 10 deeds of conveyance were executed on 26th May, 2006 and regis...
Tanima Ghosh Vs. Gitarani Ghosh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-2013
ORDER SHEET GA NO.18 OF 201.WITH CS NO.356 OF 199.GA NO.117 OF 201.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE TANIMA GHOSH Versus GITARANI GHOSH BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date :16. h January, 2013. Mr.A.MitraappeaRs.Mr.R.GhoshappeaRs.Mr.P.K.RoyappeaRs.The Court : There is absolutely no doubt, from the submissions made today that three dag Nos.1751, 1418 and 2525 in Village Maju have been sold by many of Mr.Aniruddha Mitras clients. It is said on their behalf that these properties did not constitute the subject matters of the present Partition and Administration Suit. I find from the preliminary decree dated 14th November, 2005 of a Division Bench of this Court that it included ancestral properties at Changurali, Jagatballavpur, Howrah., which are known as Maju. I further note that this description of properties in the preliminary decree did not exclude any other properties. Hence, prima facie, I tend to agree with Mr.Roy that properti...
Raj Kumar Dawer Vs. the Joint Commissioner of
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-2013
ORDER SHEET SHEET NO.1 WP No.353 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF:RAJ KUMAR DAWER Versus THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PORT),GOVT. OF INDIA & ORS BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE Date :16. h January, 2013. Appearance:Mr.R.N.Dutta, Advocate, Mr.Aniruddha Roy, Advocate, Ms.Sutapa RoyChowdhury, Advocate with Mr.R.K.Rai, Advocate..for the Petitioner. Mr.P.K.Roy, Advocate, Mr.P D. Mukherjee, Advocate..for the Respondents. The Court :-Heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties. An order passed by the Additional Commissioner of Customs (Port) on 10th February, 2012 imposing certain sum as penalty against the petitioner is assailed in the writ petition. Initial objection on maintainability of the proceedings is taken by Mr.Roy, learned Counsel appearing for the Customs Authorities on the ground that there is an alternative statutory remedy in the form of appeal under the Customs Act itself. On behalf of th...