Kolkata Court February 2013 Judgments
Amrapali Barter Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mr. Deb Kumar Bose and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-26-2013
ORDER SHEET AP No.751 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE AMRAPALI BARTER PVT.LTD.Versus Mr.DEB KUMAR BOSE & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :26. h February, 2013. Mr.Sibaprasad Mukherjee, Adv.for the petitioner Mr.Jayanta Kr. Das, Adv.for respondent Nos.1 to 5 The Court : The existence of the arbitration agreement has not been questioned by the appearing respondents. The respondent Nos.6 and 7 are not represented despite deemed service. The petitioner has invoked the arbitration clause contained in an agreement of October 15, 1999. The respondent Nos.1 to 5 submit that there is no live claim since the agreement is more than a decade old and no steps were taken pursuant thereto by the parties. However, it appears from paragraph 8 of the petition that by a letter of April 11, 2012 some of the respondents caused the development agreement to be cancelled and the petitioner has founded such cancellation as the basis ...
Tag this Judgment!Ventron Fincom Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Registrar of Companies, West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-26-2013
ORDER SHEET APO No.460 of 2012 with CP No.593 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction VENTRON FINCo.PVT.LTD.Versus REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, WEST BENGAL BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE DR. MRINAL KANTI CHAUDHURI Date :26. h February, 2013. Mr.Debangshu Basak, Mr.Soumik Ghosh for the appellant. Mr.Sourav Chakraborty, Mr.Anish Dutta for the respondent. The Court : The name of the company was struck off in 2008. Upon coming to know, the company made an application for restoration after about three yeaRs.The company contended before the learned Single Judge, they were carrying on advertising business. Learned Judge did not find any such business in the Memorandum of Association as one of its principle object. Learned Judge was also doubtful about the functioning of the company. His Lordship dismissed the application. Hence this apeal. We have heard Mr.Debangshu Basak, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr.Sourav Chakraborty, le...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax West Bengali, Calcutta Vs. the General Fibr ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-26-2013
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ITR No.126 of 1993 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX WEST BENGAL-I, CALCUTTA Versus THE GENERAL FIBRE DEALERS PVT.LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE TARUN KUMAR DAS Date :26. h February, 2013. For Appellant : Mr.P.Dudhuria, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.Debasish Mitra, Advocate The Court : The only question referred to us under Section 256(1) reads as follows : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee was entitled to relief under section 35C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?.. The point was already covered by a judgment of this Court in the case of the same assessee, which has also been taken note of, reported in 248 ITR 62.wherein the question was decided in favour of the revenue. Mr.Debasish Mitra, learned advocate appearing for the assessee, referred to a judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of Comm...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India and anr. Vs. M/S. Maa Kali Supply Agency
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-26-2013
ORDER SHEET APO No.4 of 2013 with AP No.117 of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Versus M/S.MAA KALI SUPPLY AGENCY BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE DR.MRINAL KANTI CHAUDHURI Date :26. h February, 2013. Mr.L.K. Chatterjee, MRS.Aparna Banerjee for the appellant. Mr.Dipak Basu, Sr.Advocate, Mr.M.C. Ghose, Mr.Abhijit Chowdhury for respondent. The Court : This appeal would arise out of an order passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the application for condonation of delay in an arbitration proceeding initiated under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Section 34(3) would make it clear, the application would have to be made within three months and after three months has lapsed, the Court would be competent to condone the delay for a maximum period of 30 days. Hence total period to make an application for setting aside is 120 days and not beyond. The appellant contended, fraud was committ...
Tag this Judgment!Triseva Pariwahan Services Ltd. Vs. M/S. Phoenix Yule Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-26-2013
ORDER SHEET GA No.598 of 2013 CS No.276 of 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction TRISEVA PARIWAHAN SERVICES LTD.Versus M/S.PHOENIX YULE LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date:26. h February, 2013. Appearance: Ms.S.S. Bose, Advocates ...for the defendant/petitioner Mr.M.Chandra with Mr.Souveek Roy, Advocates ...for the plaintiff/respondent The conduct of the defendant/applicant is deplorable. It appears that on earlier occasion, an ex parte decree was passed which was recalled by an order dated 18th September 2007 upon the petitioner paying cost assessed at 300 GMs.The written statement, although served upon the plaintiff, was not filed in the department. The defendant conducting the litigation. was extremely lackadaisical in The defendant has failed to disclose documents in spite of an order passed on 10th December 2007. It appears that by the order dated 19th August 2005, the defence of the defendant was struck off in view of defendant to fil...
Tag this Judgment!Swapna Bhattacharjee Vs. Sambhunath Dutta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-26-2013
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE GA NO.325 OF 201.WITH CS NO.229 OF 201.SWAPNA BHATTACHARJEE Versus SAMBHUNATH DUTTA & ORS. GA NO.427 OF 201.WITH CS NO.229 OF 201.SWAPNA BHATTACHARJEE Versus SAMBHUNATH DUTTA & ORS. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date :26. h February, 2013. Mr.R.N.Chakraborty, Mr.J.Mondalappear. Mr.D.Ghosh, Mr.P.K.Nandi, Mr.S.N.Nagappear. The Court : Both these applications are disposed of by the following order : [a].The plaintiff will withdraw the suit filed by her [TS No.1735 of 2010].before the learned City Civil Court at Calcutta within two weeks from date; [b].Within the aforesaid period, the Joint Commissioners of Partition will arrange for a joint inspection of the premises by the parties, in the presence of the Joint Receivers and the Valuer/Surveyor for the purpose of confirming the measurements mentioned in the report of the Joint Commissioners of Partition. These measurements have been doubt...
Tag this Judgment!Chaitali Dey Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-26-2013
ORDER SHEET WP No.446 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF:CHAITALI DEY Versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE Date :26. h February, 2013. For Petitioner : Mr.Saptangshu Basu, Senior Advocate, Mr.Ram Anand Agarwala, Advocate, Mr.Nibedita Pal, Advocate with Mr.Anando Gopal Mukherjee, Advocate. For Respondents :Ms.Chama Mukherjee, Advocate with Md.T.M.Siddiqui, Advocate. The Court:-The petitioner is a dealer under the West Bengal Kerosene Control Order, 1968. The petitioner is being constantly allotted supply pertaining to ration cardholders above 3500 units, as it appears from annexure P-3 to the writ petition. In the period between 16th October, 2011 and 31st October, 2011, 88 ration cards were de-tagged from her dealership which took the total allocated number of ration cards in respect of her dealership to 3787. Mr.Basu, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner submi...
Tag this Judgment!Malati Maity Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-26-2013
ORDER SHEET SHEET NO.1 WP No.54 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF:MALATI MAITY Versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE Date :26. h February, 2013. For Petitioner :Mr.M.M.Das, Advocate with Mr.Debabrata Chakrabarti, Advocate. For State-Respondents :Mr.Pantu Deb Roy, Advocate with Mr.Paritosh Sinha, Advocate. The Court:-The writ petitioner has applied for an inter state stage carriage permit in the route between Kolkata and Puri as it is her case that an existing permit holder in the said route, Hijli Co-operative Transport Society LTD.has remained in operative on the route since the year 1976 and is not plying any vehicle. The application of the petitioner, however, was rejected on the date hearing took place being 20th January, 2012 in her absence. It is not in dispute that no notice was sent to her. It has been recorded in the said decision, a copy of which has been made annexu...
Tag this Judgment!Aristo Texcon Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Star Shipping Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. a ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-26-2013
ORDER SHEET GA 42.OF 201.CS 4.OF 201.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ARISTO TEXCo.PVT.LTD.Versus STAR SHIPPING SERVICES (INDIA) PVT.LTD.& ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date :26. h February, 2013 Mr.P.Chatterjee, Sr.Adv.appeaRs.Mr.T.Bose, Sr.Adv.appeaRs.Mr.A.Chowdhury, Sr.Adv.appeaRs.The Court : Mr.Chatterjee for the petitioner assures the Court on behalf of his client that his client will take all steps for release of the containers from the statutory authorities and the Container Freight Station within 25 days from date. It is to be noted that then the containers will be at the point of being destuffed. Within such period, the petitioner will pay the 1st defendant, being the container owner, Rs.40 lakhs in cash (including pay order/bank draft) and furnish a bank guarantee for Rs.22 lakhs in favour of the 1st defendant. Upon receiving such payment, the containers may be released by the 1st defendant to the petitioner for bei...
Tag this Judgment!Jugal Kishore Sorda Vs. Flender Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-26-2013
ORDER SHEET GA No.3118 of 2012 With CS No.500 of 2002 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE In the matter of: JUGAL KISHORE SORDA Versus FLENDER LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date :26. h February, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Rupak Ghosh, Adv.M.Arindam Sinha, Adv.The Court: The suit instituted by the plaintiff was dismissed for default. An application was filed for recalling of the said order dated 7th June, 2011 along with the prayer for condonation of delay. The learned Single Judge of this Court after hearing the submission of the respective parties recalled the said order upon payment of cost of 1000 GMs to be paid by the plaintiff to the defendant. The learned Judge recorded that in couRs.of hearing Mr.Arindam Sinha learned Counsel representing the defendant made over a copy of an order dated 16th March, 2010 showing that the defendant company had merged with Siemens LTD.on the date of recall, Siemens was not brought on record, altho...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »