Kolkata Court November 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.
Mrs. Bani Ray and Others Vs. Usha Ranjan Dutta Gupta and Another
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-07-2013
J. Bag, Ld. Member: The present appeal is directed against the Order dated 02.11.12 passed by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, North 24 Parganas, in CC Case No. 28 / 2011 whereby the complaint was allowed on contest against the OPs with cost. The complaint, in brief, was as follows : The Complainant , Shri Usha Ranjan Dutta Gupta, on 3rd September 2001, entered into an agreement with Shri Provash Ghosh of M/s Ghosh Construction being OP No.2 for purchase of a self- contained residential flat in a building named Aditya Apartment and made payment of Rs. 6,55,000/- (Six lakh and fifty thousand ) only on different dates to the said OP No.2. Even after receiving the said payment the possession of the flat was not delivered to the Complainant / Respondent herein . The Complainant learned that the flat had been handed over to OP No.1 i.e. Arabinda Ray , since substituted on the ground of death in August 2010. He got the information verified and found that OP No.2 ibid hande...
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-06-2013
ORDER SHEET C.P.No.680 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE In the matter of : Mirzapur Electrical Industries LTD.And Registrar of Companies, West Bengal BEFORE: The Hon'ble Justice HARISH TANDON Date: 6th November, 2013 Appearance : Mr.S.K. Laik, Adv.Mr.Hitendra Pramanik, 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.54,000/- 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.54,000/- to the Registrar of Companies within a fortnight from date...
Commissioner of Income Tax,centrali Vs. Alakananda Manufacturing and F ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-06-2013
ITA No.185 of 2001 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL-I -VersusALAKANANDA MANUFACTURING & FINANCE P.LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA -AndThe Honble JUSTICE SUBRATA TALUKDAR Date : 6th November, 2013. Appearance: Ms.Smita Das De, Adv...for the appellant. The Court : The case of the assessee was that he filed the income tax return on 31st December, 1990. The department, however, issued a notice under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in pursuance whereof a duplicate return was filed by the assessee on 11th March, 1993. The benefit of carry forward loss under Section 80 of the Income Tax Act, was not granted to the assessee by the Assessing return was belatedly filed. Officer on the ground that the The tribunal by the impugned judgment and order dated 2nd August, 1999 held that the return was duly filed in time and, therefore, the benefit could not have been withheld. The de...
Prosad Ghosh Vs. Nirmal Mundra and Others
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-06-2013
Ld. Advocates for the Appellant and the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are present. The Misc. Application bearing No. MA-544/2013 is taken up for hearing. This Misc. Application has been filed by the Appellants praying for correction of the cause title of the Memo of Appeal in respect of the name of the Respondent No. 3. We have heard the Ld. Advocates for both sides and perused the papers on record. Let the name of the Respondent No. 3 in the cause title of the Memo of Appeal be corrected accordingly. B.C. is directed to make necessary corrections in the cause title in respect of the name of the Respondent No. 3. The Misc. Application is thus disposed of. Mr. R.K.Chaumal, Ld. Advocate, submits that he will appear on behalf of the Respondent No. 3 as amended and file Vokalatnama on the next date. S/R is complete. Fix 12.6.14 for filing amended version of the Memo of Appeal and also for hearing of Appeal. BNAs may be exchanged in the meantime. Interim order of stay already passed will continue...
The Post Master General, and Others Vs. Bijay Kr. Prasad and Another
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-04-2013
Debasis Bhattacharya, Member Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment/order dated 26.11.2012 in Case No. CC/15/2011, passed by the Ld. District Forum, Hooghly, the OPs thereof have preferred this appeal. By the impugned judgment/order, the Ld. District Forum has allowed the case on contest, in part, with cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand) and directed the OPs to pay the maturity amount of the M.I.S. after deducting the double drawing interest instalments, if any and also directed them to pay interest @ 9% per annum on the maturity amount to be paid to the Petitioners for the period from the date of the maturity till the date of payment within one month from the date of the order and further directed them to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) to the Petitioners towards compensation for their mental agony and harassment and directed that such payment of Rs.10,000/- + Rs.2,000/- = Rs.12,000/- (Rupees twelve thousand) to be paid to the Petitioners within one month from t...
Srimatya Ujjawala Jana Vs. Sr. Branch Manager, Life Insurance Corporat ...
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-01-2013
J. Bag, Ld. Member: The present appeal is directed against the Order dated 14.08.12 passed by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Purba Medinipur, in Consumer Case No. 03/2012, whereby , Ld. Forum below, dismissed the complaint on contest against the OPs. The complaint case, in brief, was as follows: The Complainants husband during his life time opened an insurance policy styled as New Bima Gold policy being No. 439450588 on 20.02.2008 in the office of the OP No.1 under the control of OP Nos. 2 and 3. While driving a vehicle the insured died in a road accident. The Complainant being the nominee of her deceased husband as recorded in the policy got Rs.50,000/-(Fifty thousand rupees ) only as sum assured under the basic plan, but did not receive any accidental benefit on account of the accidental death of her husband insured. Accordingly, a consumer complaint was filed before the Ld. Forum below. The OPs contested the complaint by submitting written version. In their writ...
Samir Das and Others Vs. Mrs. Paramita Bandyopadhyay
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-01-2013
Mrs. Mridula Roy, Ld. Member: The instant Appeal is directed against the judgement and order dt. 27.11.12 passed by Ld. DCDRF, 24 Parganas (South) in C.C.No. 210 of 2011 allowing the same on contest against OP No. 3 and ex parte against OP Nos. 1 and 2 with cost directing the OP No. 3 to refund the sum of Rs. 8,84,000/- with interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of order till realization, further directing the OP No. 3 to pay Rs. 2,00,000/- towards compensation and Rs. 10,000/- towards cost within one month from the date of order, failing which the amount of compensation and cost would also carry an interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of default till realization. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the above-mentioned order the Ops have preferred the instant Appeal. The Complainants case before the Ld. District Forum, in brief, was that she entered into an agreement dt. 28.5.2009 with the OP No. 3, the Developer, who, by virtue of a Power of Attorney dt. 5.5.2008 executed by the OP Nos....
Kanhiya Lal Baid and Others Vs. Uday Shankar Banerjee and Another
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-01-2013
Kalidas Mukherjee, President: This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by Learned District Forum, Hooghly in case no.38 of 2010 allowing the complaint with cost of Rs.10,000/- and directing the OP No.1 to execute the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainants in respect of the flat in question within one month from the date of the order with the further direction upon OP No.1 to pay compensation of Rs.90,000/- for harassment and mental agony. The OP No.1 was directed to pay Rs.1 lakh (Rs.10,000/- + Rs.90,000/-) within one month from the date of order, in default interest @ 9% will accrue till realisation. The case of the complainant/respondent, in short, is that the OP No.1 is the developer and OP Nos.2 to 10 are the owners of the land. The complainants entered into an agreement with the OP No.1 on 10/08/08 for the purchase of a flat at a total consideration of Rs.13,20,000/-. The complainants paid Rs.12 lakh. On the assurance of OP No.1 the complainants supp...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›