Kolkata Court October 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.
Rajesh Nagori Vs. Bengal Waterproof Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-07-2013
ORDER SHEET GA No.3114 of 2013 CS No.64 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE BEFORE: RAJESH NAGORI Versus BENGAL WATERPROOF LTD.& ORS.The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 7th October, 2013. Mr.Jishnu Saha, Mr.Sounak Mitra, Adversus for the petitioner The Court : In a suit for framing a scheme to manage and administer the defendant No.1 this application has been filed for interim relief. The case of the petitioner is that it has a shareholding of 52% in the respondent No.1. The respondent No.1 was desirous of buying back the shares of the petitioner which was refused and on such refusal a resolution was adopted at an Extraordinary General Meeting whereby additional allotments were made. These allotments have been challenged in C.S.64 of 2013 and G.A.734 of 2013 was filed wherein by order dated 19th March, 2013 the respondents have been restrained from transferring or encumbering and/or dealing with the subject additional allotment equit...
Pioneer Publicity Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal and a ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-07-2013
ORDER SHEET GA No.3097 of 2013 CS No.370 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE PIONEER PUBLICITY CORPORATION PVT.LTD.Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date: 7th October, 2013 Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Adv.with Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury, Adv..for the petitioner In a suit for a declaration that the licence issued pursuant to the agreement dated 9th May, 2011 stood renewed, this application has been filed for interim reliefs. The case of the petitioner is that on 9th May, 2011, an agreement was executed between the petitioner and the respondents for a period of three yeaRs.The said agreement would automatically be renewed on expiry of initial three yeaRs.Such renewal has been effected and accepted by the petitioner by its letter dated 19th June, 2013. Thereafter, the petitioner was also called for a discussion by the respondents. In spite of attending the said meeting, the petitioner has received a communication d...
Smt. Swapna Bhattacharjee Vs. Sambhu Nath Dutta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-07-2013
ORDER SHEET GA NO.1663 OF2012CS NO.229 OF2010IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SMT. SWAPNA BHATTACHARJEE Versus SAMBHU NATH DUTTA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 7th October, 2013. MR.DHRUBA GHOSH, MR.P.K.NANDI,MR.S.NAG,ADVOCATES FOR PLAINTIFF MR.RABI PROSAD MOOKHERJEE, ADVOCATE FOR JOINT COMMISSIONERS OF PARTITION The Court : This matter was mentioned by the Joint Commissioners of Partition for payment of arrear remuneration. From the order dated 18th December, 2012, it appears that the report of the Joint Commissioners was taken on record. Copies were directed also to be circulated amongst the parties. On perusal of the said report, it appears that although the lots to be allotted to each of the co-sharers has been specified but on whom each of the said lots is to devolve that has not been stated in the report of the Joint CommissioneRs.Therefore, the report filed by the Joint Commissioners is not a final report in the ...
Munilal Majhi Vs. Coal India Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-07-2013
ORDER SHEET WP No.473 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE MUNILAL MAJHI Versus COAL INDIA LTD.& ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 7th October, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Subrta Ganguly, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.Aloke Kr. Banerjee, Advocate Mr.N.K.Roy, Advocate Mr.Susanta Pal, Advocate Mr.P.Basu, Advocate for the respondents The Court: I find no reason to interfere with the impugned decision dated 20th August, 2010, of the Director (Personnel) and the appellate authority of Eastern Coalfields LTD.But there is one point which is troubling me. This point needs a little elucidation from the adjudicating authority. According to the writ petitioner by a letter dated 17th April, 1999, he was released from Mandman colliery with a direction to join Hariajam colliery (see annexure P2 at page 24 of the petition).According to him, he went to join Hariajam colliery but because of the absence of the last pay certificate, he was not all...
Re : Govind Agarwal Vs. Registrar of Companies, W.B.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-07-2013
ORDER SHEET CP670OF2013IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction RE: TRISHALA COMMERCIAL & FINANCE PVT LTD.- AND RE : GOVIND AGARWAL -VSREGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, W.B.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date : 7th October, 2013. Appearance : Ms.M.Bhuteria, Adv.The Court : The petition is for resurrecting a company which has been struck off the list of functioning companies under Section 560 of the Companies Act, 1956 for the statutory records and documents not having been filed. The Registrar has filed a statement indicating therein that a total amount of Rs.78,000/- on account of filing fees, additional filing fees and penalty would be the due from the company to the Central Government if the statutory records not filed earlier were to be filed now. The petitioner accepts such position and is agreeable to pay the amount. Subject to the petitioner paying a sum of Rs.78,000/- to the Registrar of Companies within a fortnight from date, the Registrar will restore the name of ...
Re: Edp Management Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Official Liquidator, High Court, ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-07-2013
CA No.469 of 2013 CP No.170 of 1982 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY JURISDICTION Re: North Brook Jute Co.LTD.And Re: EDP Management PVT.LTD.Versus The Official Liquidator, High Court, Calcutta Before: The Hon'ble Justice Harish Tandon Date: 7th October 2013 Appearance: Mr.P.C. Sen, Sr.Advocate Mr.R.R. Sen, Advocate for the applicant Mr.Reetoborto Mitra, Advocate for the workmen Mr.Smita Das De, Advocate for the official liquidator Mr.Shantanu Mitra, Advocate for ROC The Court: This is an application under Section 466 of the Companies Act, 1956 at the instance of the applicant being the present management of the company praying for a stay of operation of the order of winding up. It is pointed out that the applicant purchased the shares of the majority shareholders of the company and has taken up the assets of the company and is running the same. The Registrar of Companies who previously accepted the returns suddenly refused to accept the same on the plea that the company has alre...
Commissioner of Income Tax, Centralii, Calcutta Vs. Lakshmangarh Estat ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-07-2013
ORDER SHEET ITA No.270 of 1999 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-II, CALCUTTA Versus LAKSHMANGARH ESTATE & TRADING CO LTD BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE RANJIT KUMAR BAG Date : 7th October, 2013. Mr.S.N.Dutta, Advocate for the Appellant Mr.J.P.Khaitan, Sr.Adv., Mr.S.Bhowmick, Adv.Mr.Siddhartha Das, Adv.Mr.C.S.Das, Adv.For the Respondent The Court : The facts and circumstances of the case briefly stated are as follows: The assessee company purchased 13,04,700 shares of M/S.Hindustan Development Corporation LTD.on 15th July, 1994 from two selleRs.one of them was a scam tainted company. The assessee sold the shares on 8th August, 1994 at a loss of Rs.4,50,04,414/- to one of its group companies. The aforesaid loss was sought to be set off against the long term capital gains earned by the assessee company, which was disallowed by the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved by the order...
Ashok Kumar Verma Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-07-2013
ORDER SHEET WP No.1103 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ASHOK KUMAR VERMA Versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 7th October, 2013. Appearance: Mr.R.K.Chowdhury, Advocate Ms.Saswati Joardar, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.R.Bharadwaj, Advocate Mr.K.K.Maiti, Advocate for the respondents The Court: At the moment, I am not disturbing the impugned order dated 3rd December, 2012, passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Airport and Administration).Customs House, Kolkata. I make it absolutely plain that at this point of time, I have not gone into the merits of the matter because the merits of the matter were not required to be gone into at this stage, considering the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner which are stated below. Mr.Chowdhury, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the Commissioner while passing the impugned order had not ruled on the question of jurisdiction which had been...
icici Bank Ltd. Vs. Stemcor India Pvt. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-07-2013
ORDER SHEET G.A.3019 of 2013 And G.A.2849 of 2013 With C.S.332 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE ICICI BANK LTD.Versus STEMCo.INDIA PVT.LTD.& ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date: 7th October, 2013. Appearance: Mr.S.B.Mukherjee, Sr.Adv.Mr.D.Sen, Adv.Ms.S.Chatterjee, Adv.Mr.M.K.Seal, Adv. for the ICICI Bank LTD.Mr.Sudipto Sarkar, Sr.Adv.Mr.Dabhangsu Basak, Adv.Mr.P.K.Khaitan, Adv.Mr.V.Jhun Jhunwala, Adv. for the respondent Nos.1, 3 & 4 The Court: By consent of the parties G.A.No.2849 of 2013 is treated on the days list The application for vacating the ad-interim order dated 19th September, 2013 is taken up along with the main interlocutory application filed on behalf of the ICICI Bank LTD.On September 19, 2013 this Court passed an order of injunction restraining the respondents and each of them from transferring, assigning, disposing, pleading or creating any charge or lien or in anyway encumbering or dealing with or disp...
Atithya Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-07-2013
WP No.437 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ATITHYA VYAPAAR PVT.LTD.& ANR. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 7th October, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Jayanta Kumar Mitra, Sr.Adv.Mr.Kishore Datta, Adv.Mr.V.H. Dwivedi, Adv.Mr.Emon Bhattacharya, Adv.Mr.Piyush Dwivedi, Adv..for the petitioners Mr.A.K. Routh, Adv.Mr.S.Pal Chowdhury, Adv..for the respondents The Court : The petitioners challenge the notices issued by the respondent bank on July 8, 2012 and March 14, 2013 by which the bank seeks to sell a property at 24A, Belvedere Road in exercise of its powers under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The notice of July 8, 2012 refers to the security interest in respect of the property being created, inter alia, on December 17, 2007. The subsequent notice of March 14, 2013 refers to January 17, 2007 as the earliest date of creation of...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »