Kolkata Court June 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.
Board of Trustees for the Port of Kolkata Vs. Official Liquidator
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-21-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction Present : The Honble Justice Ashoke Kumar Dasadhikari 21.06.2013 CA 51.of 2007 BIFR 4 of 2004 M/S.Consolidated Fibres & Chemicals LTD.(In Liqn.) And Board of Trustees for the Port of Kolkata versus Official Liquidator Mr.Jishnu Saha, Advocate appears Mr.Amal Baran Chatterjee, Senior Advocate appears Mr.S.Roychowdhury, Advocate appears The Court :- Today is the date fixed for holding auction of the machinery etc.since the highest offeror M/S.Apsara Projects & Infrastructure PVT.LTD.failed to pay the bid amount of Rs.20.50 crores for which an undertaking was given by the Managing Director of the said Company. The Company was to pay Rs.3 crores within June 5, 2013 and the balance amount was to be paid by one month thereafter. By June 5, 2013 no amount was deposited with the Official Liquidator. Since he had failed to keep his undertaking a contempt rule is issued against him. However, Mr.Chatterjee, learned counsel appearing today asking...
Dipali Burman Vs. Cesc Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-21-2013
ORDER SHEET SHEET NO.1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE WP No.384 of 2013 IN THE MATTER OF:DIPALI BURMAN Versus CESC LTD.& ORS.WITH WP No.9860(W) of 2013 IN THE MATTER OF:KABITA DAS KARMAKAR -VSSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.WP No.12384(W) of 2013 IN THE MATTER OF:REHANA HELA -VSSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.WP No.9864(W) of 2013 IN THE MATTER OF:BABY KHATOON -VSSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.WP No.10152(W) of 2013 IN THE MATTER OF:DIPA KONAI -VSSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.WP No.9866(W) of 2013 IN THE MATTER OF:REKHA RAJBANSHI -VSSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.WP No.9858(W) of 2013 IN THE MATTER OF:JUBEDA KHATOON -VSSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE Date :21. t June, 2013. Appearance:Mr.Sudip Banerjee, Advocate with Mr.Pratik Manna, Advocate..for the petitioner. (In W.P.No.12384(W) of 2013) Mr.Sudip Banerjee, Advocate with Mr.Pratik Manna, Advocate..for the petitioner. (In W.P.No.10152(W) of 2013) Mr.Mohinoor Rahaman, Advo...
Dilip Sankar Das and ors. Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-21-2013
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE WP No.517 of 2013 DILIP SANKAR DAS & ORS.Versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date :21. t June, 2013. For Petitioners : Mr.A.K. Maiti with Mr.S.M. Obaidullah, Advocates For Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : MRS.Chaitali Bhattacharyay with Mr.S.T. Mitra, Advocates For CTC : Mr.Pantu Deb Roy with Mr.S.Ruj and Mr.S.Guha Biswas, Advocates The Court : Having heard Mr.Maiti, learned Advocate for the petitioners and Mr.Deb Roy, learned Advocate for the respondent-company and its officeRs.I am of the view that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending, having regard to the nature of grievance raised therein. The petitioners seek an order on the respondents to pay interest that has accrued on certain sums paid to them belatedly. It does not appear from the writ petition that the petitioners have given any break up of their entitlements. Since the...
Re: Tata Construction and Projects Ltd. (In Liquidation) Vs. Official ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-21-2013
1 ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction CA No.111 of 2013 With BIFR No.153 of 1987 RE: TATA CONSTRUCTION & PROJECTS LTD.(IN LIQUIDATION) VERSUS OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date :21. t June, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Kushagra Shah, Adv.Mr.Goutam Kr. Ray, Adv.Mr.B.Mohanty, Adv.The Court: The sale was confirmed at Rs.77 lakhs on 8th March, 2013 in favour of Aditya Scraps subject, however, to the payment of the entire consideration money within four weeks from date. It was further indicated that if the balance earnest deposit was not putting in with the official liquidator within a week from date, the initial earnest deposit of Rs.5 lakhs shall stand forfeited and the sale shall be confirmed in favour of the second highest bidder. Similar directions were also passed in respect of the second highest bidder and the same was intended to be confirmed in favour of the third highest bidder. In the penultimate paragraph it was recorded that i...
Amiya Kr. Dutta Vs. the Principal Secretary.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-21-2013
ORDER SHEET SHEET NO.1 W.P.No.616 of 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF:AMIYA KR. DUTTA Versus THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. DEPTARTMENT OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY & ORS. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASHOKE KUMAR DASADHIKARI Date :21. t June, 2013. Appearance:- Mr.Amitava Mukherjee, Advocate, Ms.Arpita Saha, Advocate with Mr.Abhijit Bhattacharya, Advocate. ..for the petitioner. Mr.Arunava Ghosh, Advocate, Mr.Dwaipayan SenGupta, Advocate with Mr.Indranil Karfa, Advocate. ..for the respondents. The Court:-The writ petitioners removal is the subject matter of this writ petition. His removable from service without issuing any show cause notice and charge-sheet and also without holding any enquiry by the West Bengal Tea Development Corporation contrary to Ltd. all hereinafter norms and referred practices. to as Corporation. The writ petitioner is was appointed by a letter dated 18th March, 1998. Contents of the appointment letter reads a...
Asha Audio Company and anr. Vs. Om Prakash Sonik and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-21-2013
ORDER SHEET GA NO.1741 OF 201.CS NO.202 OF 201.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ASHA AUDIO COMPANY AND ANR. Versus OM PRAKASH SONIK & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date :21. t June, 2013. APPEARANCE: Mr.Jayanta Kr.Mitra, Sr.Advoate, Mr.S.Banerjee, Mr.Santosh Kr.Roy, Advocates appear Mr.Ranjan Bachawat,Sr.Advocate Mr.S.Roychowdhury, Advocate for Music Composer Mr.S.N.Mookherjee, Sr.Advocate, Mr.Samrat Sen, Mr.Shaunak Mitra, Mr.P.Naskar, Advocates For respondent no.1 Mr.S.K.Kapoor, Sr.Advocte, Mr.R.K.Kapoor, Mr.Chayan Gupta, Mr.D.R.Basu, Advocates for respondent no.2 Mr.Anindya Kr. Mitra, Sr.Advocate, Mr.Satadip Bhattachariya, Advocate for respondent No.3 Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Mr.Soumabha Ghose, Advocates for respondent no.4 Mr.Anirban Roy, Mr.Debabrata Das Advocates for respondent no.6 The Court : Leave under Section 80(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure was granted at the time of presentation of plaint. This application has been so...
M/S. Banwarilal Pasari Vs. Anandilal Narendra Kumar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-21-2013
GA No.1313 of 2013 GA No.1123 of 2013 CS 14.of 2001 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.BANWARILAL PASARI Versus ANANDILAL NARENDRA KUMAR & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date :21. t June, 2013. Mr.Sarbapriya Mukherjee,Advocate appeaRs.Mr.Debmalya Ghosal,Advocate appeaRs.Mr.D.Mitra,Advocate appeaRs.MRS.Debraj Mitra,Advocate appeaRs.The Court :Re : GA No.1313 of 2013 A prayer for adjournment is made on behalf of the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner/applicant. The affidavit-in-opposition on behalf of the plaintiff filed in Court is taken on record. The time to file the affidavit-in-reply is extended till 27th June,2013. Let GA No.1313 of 2013 appear on 28th June,2013. The learned Advocate-on-Record for the applicant is, however, not present in Court. In view thereof, the learned Advocate-on-Record on behalf of the defendant No.1 is requested to communicate this order to Mr.Muroli Mohan Roy,learned Advocate-on-Record on behalf of the app...
Madan Kumar Das Vs. United Bank of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-21-2013
ORDER SHEET WP No.474 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE MADAN KUMAR DAS Versus UNITED BANK OF INDIA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date:21. t June, 2013 Mr.Swapan Kumar Dutta, Adv.with Mr.Sambuddha Dutta, Adv..for the petitioner Mr.R.N. Majumdar, Adv.with Mr.Supratim Bhattacharjee, Adv..for the respondents The petitioner has been convicted by the Special Court for commission of offence punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years and also fined for a sum of Rs.2,000/-. In view of such conviction, the disciplinary authority of the petitioner after extending reasonable opportunity of hearing to him has terminated his service and imposed the punishment of compulsory retirement from service in terms of Regulations 4 and 10 read with Regulation 11 of the United Bank of India Officer Employees (Discipline & Appeal) Regulations, 1976. Feeling aggrieved by the pe...
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-21-2013
ORDER SHEET CP No.378 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction CARGO LINERS PVT.LTD.And UJALA MERCHANTS & TRADERS LTD BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date :21. t June, 2013. Appearance: Ms.Manju Bhuteria, Adv.Ms.Rakhi Shroff, Adv.The Court : The winding up petition was admitted on 16th May, 2012 for a sum of Rs.25 lakhs together with an interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of the dishonour of the cheque till payment. This winding up petition is listed at the post advertisement stage. counsel. The company is represented by the On perusal of the order admitting the winding up petition, it appears that various defence both on merit as well as technical were taken and found by the Company Court to be moonshine. Admittedly, the cheque for a sum of Rs.25 lakhs was issued by the company in favour of the petitioning creditor which was dishonoured. Although under the Company Court Rules, 1959 the company is entitled to use affidavit-in-opposition but ...
Rajesh P. Thakkar Vs. Cesc Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-21-2013
ORDER SHEET GA NO.1680 OF 201.WITH WP NO.410 OF 201.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE RAJESH P. THAKKAR Versus CESC LTD.& ORS. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date :21. t June, 2013. Mr.S.Bandopadhyay, Mr.A.K.Nagfor the petitioner. Mr.S.Talukdar, senior advocate, Mr.S.K.Basu, Ms.H.Chakrabortyfor the respondent no.5. Mr.D.Basakfor the flat owneRs.Mr.A.Mitrafor the flat owneRs.Mr.S.Sanyal, Mr.P.Mukherjeefor CESC LTD.The Court : In this application the petitioner seeks clarification of order dated 8th October, 2012. Such direction is sought on the assumption that the order dated 8th October, 2012 be reviewed. Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure has set out the instances when a review application can be filed. Subsequent event is one such consideration by the Court while exercising review jurisdiction. The only subsequent event that one can assess is the notice dated 5th June, 2013. This notice is a fall out of the order dated 8th Octo...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »