Kolkata Court August 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.
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-2013
ORDER SHEET CA No.351 of 2013 With CP No.66 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF: ARVIND CHEMICALS LTD.And MANALI PETROCHEMICALS LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date :26. h August, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Kuldip Mallick, Adv.Mr.M.S.Tiwary, Adv.The Court : This is an application at the instance of the petitioning creditor for extension of time to make an advertisement in pursuance of an order dated 8th July, 2012. The company intervenes in this application and signifies its intention to pay off the balance sum. The company says that they have an honest intention to liquidate the dues but because of the unavoidable circumstances the money could not be paid within the time as indicated in the order dated 17th December, 2012. The company has brought a demand draft bearing No.055561 dated 20.8.2013 drawn on HDFC Bank, Stephen House Branch for a sum of Rs.5 lakhs and handed over the same to the learned advocate-on-record of the...
Srei Equipment Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/S. Akshya Engineering and Const ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-2013
AP No.631 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE PVT.LTD.Versus M/S.AKSHYA ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTIONS & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :26. h August, 2013. Mr.Satarup Banerjee, Adv.appears The Court : The respondents are not represented despite previous service. In view of the unconscionable conduct of the finance company, this petition is dismissed. The Receiver stands discharged without being required to file any accounts. All offers received should be returned. This matter has been pending for more than a year and the finance company has willy-nilly had the award executed despite the award having been passed only in July, 2013. This is the usual game plan of a finance company which uses the Section 9 proceedings for the recovery of the amount covered by the arbitral award by artificially keeping it pending for an inordinate period. Oftentimes, purchasers are propped up by the finance companies who ar...
Sri Pradeep Kumar Saraff Vs. Smt. Bina Devi Saraff and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-2013
ORDER SHEET GA NO.2245 OF 201.CS NO.3 OF 201.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE Sr.PRADEEP KUMAR SARAFF Versus SMT. BINA DEVI SARAFF & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date :26. h August, 2013. Mr.Sakya Sen, Mr.Lal Ratan Mondal, Ms.N.Adhya, Advocates for plaintiff Ms.Piyali Sengupta, Mr.B.Goswami, Advocates for petitioner Mr.A.K.Chowdhury, Mr.C.Dutta, Advocates for ICICI Bank LTD.The Court : In proceeding filed before the DRT by ICICI Bank LTD.Special Officer has been appointed by the presiding officer to take possession of one asset mortgaged by the plaintiff to the Bank. The applicant seeks an order of injunction restraining the Bank from disposing of the said asset, as the same is a part of Schedule-A property in the partition suit. The applicant also seeks direction upon the Special Officer to take physical possession of the vacant and locked portions of the immovable properties as per the report filed by the Receiver. Hence, th...
Channel 10 Employees Welfare Association Vs. Bengal Media Pvt. Ltd. an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-2013
ORDER SHEET GA No.2498 of 2013 CS No.297 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE CHANNEL 1 EMPLOYEES WELFARE ASSOCIATION Versus BENGAL MEDIA PVT.LTD.& ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date :26. h August, 2013. Mr.Mr.Mr.Mr.Mr.Sudipta Sarkar, Sr.Adv.Anirban Roy, Adv.Sanjay Basu, Adv.Rajdeep Majumder, Adv.S.Chakraborty, Adv.for the petitioner Mr.Ashoke Banerjee, Sr.Adv.Mr.Sakya Sen, Adv.Mr.P.Sinha, Adv.for the State The Court : In a suit for framing a scheme for administration and management of the respondent No.1, this application has been filed. The petitioner is the Employees Welfare Association of Channel 10. The said channel by virtue of the misdeeds of its directors faced a closure and all the petitioners seek at this stage is that the said channel should be allowed to continue under the management of persons mentioned in paragraph 27 of the petition. Hence this application has been filed and order sought. Counsel for the resp...
B.R. Singh and Co. and anr. Vs. L and T Finance Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-2013
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE GA NO.2393 OF 201.APOT NO.383 OF 201.AP NO.590 O 201.AND GA NO.2395 OF 201.APOT NO.384 OF 201.AP NO.583 O 201.AND GA NO.2396 OF 201.APOT NO.385 OF 201.AP NO.594 O 201.AND GA NO.2397 OF 201.APOT NO.386 OF 201.AP NO.585 O 201.AND GA NO.2398 OF 201.APOT NO.387 OF 201.AP NO.584 O 201.B.R.SINGH & Co.& ANR. Versus L & T FINANCE LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE Dr. SAMBUDDHA CHAKRABARTI Date :26. h August, 2013. Appearance : Mr.A.S.Roy, Advocate Mr.A.K.Singh, Advocate Mr.Arif Ali, Advocte for the appellant. Mr.Paritosh Sinha, Advocate for the respondent. The Court : There has been admitted due to the extent of Rs.70 lakhs as on the date of passing of the order by the learned single Judge. Out of five agreements, fiRs.two expired by efflux of time. Three, four and five are running agreements and instalments are mounting up. The learned Judge asked the Receiver to take po...
Biva Pyne and anr. Vs. Chunilall Pyne and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-2013
ORDER SHEET GA NO.1683 OF 201.CS NO.219 OF 200.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction BIVA PYNE & ANR. Versus CHUNILALL PYNE & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date :26. h August, 2013. Mr.Mr.Mr.Mr.Mr.Anindya Mitra, Sr.Adv.Surajit Nath Mitra, Sr.Adv.Debangsu Basak, Adv.Deepnath RoyChowdhury, Adv.Sourav Sengupta, Adv.for plaintiff/petitioner Mr.Pratap Chatterjee, Sr.Adv.Mr.Ranjan Bachawat, Adv.Mr.Suman Kumar Dutt, Adv.Mr.S.Sengupta, Adv.Mr.Samanya Sengupta, Adv.Mr.S.Das, Adv.for respondents Mr.Jayanta Mitra, Sr.Adv.Mr.Aniruddha Roy, Adv.Mr.Arindam Banerjee, Adv.MRS.Sudeshna Bagchi, Adv.Ms.D.Dutta, Adv.for Purchaser The Court : This is an application filed by the plaintiffs for dismissal of G.A.No.365 of 2008 as withdrawn and for discharge of Receiver appointed by order dated 15th February, 2008. The case of the petitioner is that in a suit for a declaration that the defendant nos.1 and 2 were in control of the defendant no.4 and in possession of the t...
Tarak Kumar Mondal and Another Vs. Kailash Nath Dhar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Original Side Present : The Honble Justice Subhro Kamal Mukherjee And The Honble Justice Asim Kumar Mondal August 26, 2013 GA 323.of 2012 APDT 1 of 2012 CS 36.of 1991 Tarak Kumar Mondal and another versus Kailash Nath Dhar Mr.Sudip Ghosh, Mr.Deep Nath Roy Chowdhury, Mr.Jayanta Dutta . For the appellant The Court :- This is an application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, arising out of a suit for specific performance of contract. Initially, the appeal was filed together with a certified copy of the decree impugned in this appeal. The certified copy of the judgment was not annexed to the memorandum of appeal. Under Order 41, rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, it is incumbent upon the appellant to file the certified copy of the judgment appealed against together with the memorandum of appeal. Mr.D.N.Roy Chowdhury, learned advocate appears in support of the application for condonation of delay. A supplementary aff...
Khatiza Begum and ors. Vs. Md. Ishaque and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-2013
ORDER SHEET GA NO.2281 OF 201.WITH CS NO.404 OF 201.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE KHATIZA BEGUM & ORS.Versus Md.ISHAQUE & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date :26. h August, 2013. Mr.D.Ghoshs, Mr.P.K.Nandi, Mr.S.N.Nagfor plaintiff. Mr.A.K.Chatterjee..for defendant no.1 The Court : Report filed by the Receiver be kept on record. Let copies be circulated amongst the parties. From the report filed by the Receiver appointed by order dated 12th August, 2013 it appears that a sum of Rs.43,143/- is collected from the premises in question. The receiver appointed is directed to collect rents, issues and profits in respect of the said premises from the occupants therein month by month and for such purposes the Receiver will open a separate account with any nationalised bank. Although it has been contended by counsel for the respondent no.1 that he is the owner of more than 50 % share in the said premises as the said premises was bough...
Senco Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. vs. New Senco'S Gold Queen Jewellers and Ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-26-2013
ORDER SHEET GA NO.2194 OF 201.CS NO.118 OF 199.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SENCO JEWELLERS PVT.LTD.Versus NEW SENCO'S GOLD QUEEN JEWELLERS & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date :26. h August, 2013. MR.RAJ.BASU CHOWDHURY, MR.B.BISWAS, MR.K.DAS, ADVOCATES FOR PETITIONERS MR.S.K.MAZUMDAR,DEFEFENDANT NO.4 The Court : C.S.No.118 of 1995 appeared under Chapter X Rule 35 of the Original Side Rules and was dismissed as no step had been taken for either lodging the writ of summons or pursuing the suit. Such order was passed as none had appeared on behalf of the petitioner to apprise the court of the facts of the case. This day the order dated 2nd May, 1995 has been placed before court which order was passed by consent of parties. On 2nd May, 1995 a decree was passed whereby the defendants agreed not to use the name SENCO. and agreed to carry on their business under the name of NEWSHEN GOLD QUEEN(JEWELLERS).C.S.No.118 of 1995 had bee...
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-21-2013
ORDER SHEET CP No.157 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF: KIRAN VYAPAR LTD.And IN THE MATTER OF: MAHARAJ.SHREE UMAID MILLS LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date :21. t August, 2013. Appearance: Mr.S.B. Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.D.N.Sharma, Adv.Mr.Gourav Khaitan, Adv.Ms.S.Mitra, Adv.The Court : The Central Government have taken two fold objections in the affidavit against the sanction of the scheme of the merger proposed by the petitioneRs.The fiRs.objection relates to non-submission of the consent of the creditors in respect of a long term borrowings and the second objection relates to insufficiency of the authorised share capital of the resulting company to allot the shares to the share holders of the demerged company. On February 27, 2013 when the instant application was moved a supplementary affidavit was filed annexing the no-objection letter issued by the creditors and no-dues certificate issued by the State Bank of Indi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »