Kolkata Court April 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.
Sukumar Dawn Vs. Coal India Limited and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE Present: The Honble Justice Sambuddha Chakrabarti W.P.No.425 of 2012 Sukumar Dawn Versus Coal India Limited & ORS.For the petitioner : Mr.Partha Ghosh, Advocate For the respondents : Mr.A.Halder, Advocate Heard on :21. 08.2012, 09.10.2012, 16.10.2012, 11.12.2012, 18.12.2012 & 08.01.2013 Judgement on :30. 04.2013 The Court : The petitioner is an employee of the Eastern Coal Fields Limited, i.e., the respondent No.2. He was appointed in the year 1980. According to the petitioner he appeared in the School Final examination in the year 1975 and in the Admit Card that was issued by the concerned Board his date of birth appears as October 3, 1957. The school where he studied also issued a certificate to that effect. At the time of entry into his service the petitioner disclosed his date of birth as that and he submitted the proof of his educational documents. According to him the respondents authorities did not corr...
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-2013
CP No.317 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION IN THE MATTER OF: BHAWNA MERCANTILE PVT.LTD.AND REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, WEST BENGAL BEFORE THE HONBLE JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE DATE: April 30, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Chayan Gupta, Adv.Ms.Santa Mitra, 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 a total amount of Rs.70,000/- on account of filing fees, additional filing fees and penalty would be 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.95,000/- to the Registrar of Companies within a fortnight from date, the Registrar will restore the name of the company ...
Naresh Kumar Gupta Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side Present : The Honble Justice Dr. Sambuddha Chakrabarti 30.04.2013 WP 22.of 2013 Naresh Kumar Gupta versus State of West Bengal & ORS.Mr.Ramesh Chowdhury, Advocate for the petitioner. The Court :- Let affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept with the record. In spite of service none appears to oppose this application. I have been informed by Mr.Chowdhury, the learned Advocate for the petitioner that several writ petitions have already been filed praying for identical relief as prayed for in the writ petition. It may be mentioned that by the present writ petition the petitioner has inter alia prayed for a declaration that the provisions of West Bengal Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 2012 are ultra vires the Constitution of India and for other reliefs. The same was the subject matter of the several other writ petitions and a learned single Judge on 19th December, 2012 in WP 103.of 2012 (Mageb...
Commissioiner of Income Tax, Kolkata –i, Kolkata Vs. M/S. Lalwani Me ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-2013
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction [Income Tax].ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT No.64 of 2013 GA No.689 of 2013 COMMISSIOINER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA I, KOLKATA Versus M/S.LALWANI METALLICES PRIVATE LIMITED BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE TARUN KUMAR DAS Date :30. h April, 2013. For Appellant : MRS.Soma Chatterjee, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.J.P. Khaitan, Sr.Advocate with Mr.A.Sengupta, Mr.C.S. Das and Mr.S.Das, Advocates The Court : This is an appeal preferred by the Revenue. The question proposed reads as follows: Whether on the fact and circumstances of the case, the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in deleting the addition of Rs.4,49,93,146/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of bogus/ingenuine purchase made by the Assessee from VISPL. The Assessing Officer, appears to have, added a sum of Rs.4,49,93,145/- to the income of the assessee on account of bogus purchases. The aforesaid addition is based...
Amjad Ali Vs. the Official Liquidator, High Court, Calcutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-2013
CA No.178 of 2013 CP No.580 of 2000 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION In the matter of: Sutna Stone & Lime Co.LTD.(In Liqn.) And Amjad Ali versus The Official Liquidator, High Court, Calcutta BEFORE THE HONBLE JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date: April 30, 2013 Appearance: Ms.Sucharita Biswas, Adv.Mr.Debapriya Ghosh, Adv.Mr.Ahin Chowdhury, Sr.Adv.Ms.Ruma Sikdar, Adv.for the Official Liquidator The Court: The applicants seek leave under Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956, for instituting a suit in this Court against the Official Liquidator for the Official Liquidator have allegedly taken possession of or attempted to take possession of a land of about 5000 sq. ft. at Sutna over which the applicants claim title. The applicants had applied earlier but the leave sought was not granted since the applicants did not file any scrap of paper in support of their claim to title. On an appeal from the relevant order, the appellate Court gave the applicants leave to apply afresh upon...
Soumita Mukherjee (Patra) Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-2013
WP 41.of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side Soumita Mukherjee (Patra) -vsThe State of West Bengal & ORS.Present : The Honble Justice DEBASISH KAR GUPTA April 30, 2013. Appearance : Mr.Anjan Bhattacharya, Advocate. for the petitioner Mr.Sadananda Ganguly, Advocate. Ms.Priyanka Tibrewal, Advocate. for the State. Mr.P.S. Deb Barman, Advocate. Mr.S.Alam, Advocate. for respdt. Nos.5 and 6. THE COURT : This writ petition is filed by the petitioner assailing an order passed by the respondent no.3 under Memo. No.132/1(6)/Law dated November 10, 2008. By virtue of the impugned order, the respondent no.3 rejected the prayer of the petitioner for approval of her appointment as an Assistant Teacher in Social Science Group of Shree Balkrishna Vithalnath Vidyalaya (H.S.).District Kolkata. According to the petitioner, she was appointed in the school under reference in Language Group against the vacancy created due to retirement of one Assistant Teacher...
M/S. Sunrise Food Products Pvt.Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner, Commercial T ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-2013
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE APOT No.179 of 2013 GA No.1119 of 2013 GA No.1120 of 2013 WP No.862 of 2012 M/S.SUNRISE FOOD PRODUCTS PVT.LTD.Versus THE COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAX & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE TARUN KUMAR DAS Date :30. h April, 2013. For Appellant : Mr.Sunil Kumar Chakraborty, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.Soumitra Mukherjee, Advocate The Court : There is delay of 39 days. Mr.Mukherjee, learned Advocate appearing for the respondent, very fairly did not oppose the prayer for condonation of delay. Accordingly, the prayer for condonation of delay is allowed. The subject matter of challenge in this appeal is a judgment and order dated 4.1.2013 passed by brother Soumitra Pal, J., refusing to direct the authorities in the State of West Bengal to issue declaration Form C. It is not in dispute that the declaration Form C is required in connection with a transaction which took p...
Binay Opto Electronics Pvt. Ltd. anr. Vs. Comm. of Central Excise and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-2013
ORDER SHEET WP No.201 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side BINAY OPTO ELECTRONICS PVT.LTD.ANR. Versus COMM. OF CENTRAL EXCISE & SERVICE TAX (APPEALS-I).KOL & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DR. SAMBUDDHA CHAKRABARTI Date :30. h April, 2013. Appearance: Mr.J.P.Khaitan, Sr.Advocate Mr.Agnibesh Sengupta, Advocate .for the petitioners Mr.Sekhar B. Sharof with Mr.Subir kr. SAha, Advocates ..for the respondent nos.1 & 2. The Court: Heard Mr.Khaitan for the petitioners and Mr.Sharof for the respondents. Let the affidavit of service filed in court today be kept with the record. After hearing the learned Advocates for the respective parties and after going through the order impugned in the writ petition I am of the view that the dispute raised by this petition is to be decided on affidavits. In view of the ensuing summer vacation, Mr.Sharof prays for a little longer time to file affidavit-in-opposition than usual. Let an affidavit-in-opposition b...
Anadinath Banerjee and anr. Vs. the Coal India Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-2013
ORDER SHEET W.P.NO.1650 OF 200.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE ANADINATH BANERJEE & ANR. -VSTHE COAL INDIA LTD.& ORS.PRESENT: THE HONBLE JUSTICE ASHOKE KUMAR DASADHIKARI APRIL 30 2013. MR.S.GANGULLY, ADV., FOR PETITIONERs.Mr.A BANERJEE, ADV., FOR RESPOINDENTS. THE COURT: The writ petitioner no.1 is the father of the writ petitioner no.2. the writ petitioner no.1 was the owner of about 2.0 acres of land in Sonepur Bazari Project area. The respondents authorities were in need of land for running their project. The land of the writ petitioner no.1 was acquired. A rehabilitation scheme was formulated which was tripartite in nature wherein the respondents authorities declared that in case of acquisition of one acre of land, one employment would be given and in case of acquisition of two acres of land two employments would be given. According to the rehabilitation scheme, a list was prepared which is disclosed in the writ petition. The fiRs.empane...
Vs. the Union of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-30-2013
W.P.387 OF 201.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE INDIAN RAILWAY CATERERS ASSOCIATION & ANR.Petitioners Versus THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS.. Respondents BEFORE The Honble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA For the petitioners For the respondents : Mr.S.N.Mukherjee, Sr.Advocate with Mr.B.Bhattacharya, Advoate : Mr.Ashok Chakraborty, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Swapan Banerjee and Mr.Saptarshi Roy, Advoates April 30, 2013 THE COURT : Mr.Mukherjee, learned senior counsel for the petitioners files in Court today a supplementary affidavit. He submits that liberty therefor had been granted on 26th April, 2013. Mr.Chakraborty, learned senior counsel representing the respondents objects to the supplementary affidavit being taken on record. He relies on the decisions of this Court reported in (2003) 4 COMP-LJ 33.(Cal) and 2009(2) CHN 94.to contend that the petitioners ought to file an application for amendment to bring on record the facts that have been pleaded in such affida...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »