Skip to content

Kolkata Court September 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.

Sep 02 2013

Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.Re

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Sep-02-2013

ORDER SHEET W.P.No.1237 of 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE PURUSHOTTAM KUMAR BAJAJ & ANR. Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.Petitioners Respondents BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASHOKE KUMAR DASADHIKARI Date :2. d September, 2013. For Petitioners : Mr.P.Gupta with Mr.J.K.Mukherjee, Adversus For State : Mr.Amitesh Banerjee with Mr.Ayan Banerjee, Adversus This writ petition was moved against the impugned assessment made by the Collector, Kolkata, Government of West Bengal, as well as the Commissioner, Presidency Division. The matter relates to assessment of value of 383 sq.ft. shop-room at Clive Row, Kolkata. As per writ petitioners assessment the value of the shop-room would be Rs.11,00,000/- [Eleven lakhs only].The concerned Collector, Kolkata, assessed it at Rs.18,38,400/- [Eighteen lakhs thirty eight thousand four hundred only].writ petitioner preferred an appeal against the assessment before Commissioner, Presidency Division. The Commi...


Sep 02 2013

Appellant Vs. Respondent

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Sep-02-2013

ORDER SHEET CA 36.OF 201.BIFR 19 OF 198.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF : M/S NIPHA STEELS LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date :2. d September, 2013. Appearance : Ms.R.Kajaria, Adv.Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury, Adv.Mr.Saptarshi Mukherjee, Adv. for Nipha Exports (P)LTD.and unsecured creditors No.2.G.D. Shah 3. M.C.Shah 4. Nipha India (P) LTD.5. Nipha Sales 6. P.K.Shah. Mr.S.N. Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Debangsu Basak, Adv.Ms.Smita Das De, Adv.The Court : At the outset it is pointed out by Mr.Mukherjee that the number of the BIFR proceeding has been wrongly recorded in the application i.e.C.A.No.116 of 2003 as well as in the present application. He seeks for leave to correct the same. Leave is granted. Learned advocate on record of the petitioner is directed to correct the number of the BIFR proceeding here and now. Perused the lay note of the Registrar, Original Side. It is indicated that despite the best effort, the records relatin...


Sep 02 2013

Dwarka Nath Sien Vs. State of West Bengal and Others

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Sep-02-2013

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 September 2, 2013 APO 24.of 2013 GA 221.of 2013 WP 47.of 2013 Dwarka Nath Sien versus State of West Bengal and others Mr.Kishore Dutta For the appellant Mr.L.Vishal Kumar, Mr.Rajesh Upadhyay For the respondent Nos.4 and 5 Mr.Paritosh Sinha For the State and also the respondent no.6 The Court :- By consent of Mr.Kishore Dutta, learned advocate for the appellant, Mr.Paritosh Sinha, learned advocate representing the State respondent including the respondent no.6 and Mr.L.Vishal Kumar, learned advocate for the private respondent Nos.4 and 5, the appeal itself, treating it as on days list, is taken up for hearing. This appeal is directed against an order passed by the Honble single Judge, in substance, rejecting an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for police help by the landlord against his tenants and...


Sep 02 2013

Biswajit Dutt and ors. Vs. the Administrator General of West Bengal

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Sep-02-2013

ORDER SHEET ATA NO.6 OF 201.IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE BISWAJIT DUTT & ORS.Versus THE ADMINISTRATOR GENERAL OF WEST BENGAL BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date :2. d September, 2013. Mr.RUPAK GHOSH, MR.S.BOSE, ADVOCATES FOR PETITIONERS MR.INDRANIL NANDI, MR.D.P.SAMANTA, ADVOCATES FOR OFFICIAL TRUSTEE The Court : Although a scheme was formulated in respect of the trust of Babu Sagore Dutt, the said scheme was modified from time to time and the last modification was made by an order dated 23rd February, 2009 whereby there was an increase in the amounts which was spent during seva puja, Dol Jatra, Janmastami, Durga Puja etc.The applicants who are shebaits of the said trust seek further enhancement of the amounts earmarked by the modified scheme of February 2009. Although the modified scheme of 2009 provided that there would be 25% increase in the amounts utilised for seva puja and like every five yeaRs.the instant application has ...


Sep 02 2013

Manmohan Jhunjhunwala Vs. Biswanath Jhunjhunwala

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Sep-02-2013

1 ORDER SHEET APO No.129 of 2013 GA No.3085 of 2012 PLA No.217 of 2001 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE GOODS OF : SHRI KRISHAN JHUNJHUNWALA (DEC) -AND- MANMOHAN JHUNJHUNWALA -VSBISWANATH JHUNJHUNWALA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE MRINAL KANTI CHAUDHURI Date :2. d September, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Joydeep Kar, Mr.Satarup Banerjee And Mr.Sourav Sengupta, ld. Advocates For the appellant. Mr.Shyam Sarkar,Sr.Advocate with Mr.D.N. Sharma, Mr.Gourav Khaitan Ld. Advocates for the respondent. The Court :- The backdrop of this case has a chequered career and is somewhat ugly. In a Probate proceeding, the objector being aggrieved by the grant of probate, preferred an pendency of the appeal, another appeal. During the party filed a cross- objection. Before the appeal could be disposed of, the parties applicant allegedly annexed entered two into four agreements, agreements. one would The record settlement of disput...


Sep 02 2013

Smt. Arati Addy and ors. Vs. Namita Das and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Sep-02-2013

ORDER SHEET GA No.892 of 2013 With EOS No.32 of 1987 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Extra Ordinary Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SMT. ARATI ADDY & ORS.Versus NAMITA DAS & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date :2. d September, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Tapas Banerjee, Advocate. Mr.Triptimoy Talukder, Advocate. for Subhas Ch. Baral, Mr.Kuldip Mallick, Advocate for defendant no.3 Mr.Ramesh Sharma, Advocate. Receiver. The Court : By order dated 20th June, 2013 advertisement was directed to be published as the last advertisement was published in 2008. It is only for nonservice of the said order that publication could not be effected by the receiver. Accordingly time to make publication is extended by four weeks. To prevent nonimplementation of the order passed this day, Counsel for Mr.Subhas Chandra Baral is directed to serve a copy of the order passed this day on the receiver. This direction is given on the intending purchaser as no step has been taken by the applicants in GA No.8...


Sep 02 2013

Maqsood Ahmed Khan Vs. Kolkata Municipal Corporation and ors

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Sep-02-2013

ORDER SHEET WP No.860 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE MAQSOOD AHMED KHAN Versus KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA Date :2. d September, 2013. Appearance : Mr.Saptangsu Basu, Senior Advocate. Mr.Sourav Banerjee, Advocate. Mr.S.K.Poddar, Advocate. for the petitioner. Ms.Piyali Sengupta, Advocate. for the KMC Mr.Sanjib Chakraborty, Advocate. for the respdt. no.6 Md.Farhaduddin, Advocate. for the respdt. no.7 Mr.C.K. saha, Advocate. Mr.N.A. Tarafdar, Advocate. for the respdt. no.8 Mr.S.Banerjee, Advocate. Mr.A.Samanta, Advocate. for the resdt. Nos.9, 10 & 11. The Court : Let the supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner in Court today be kept with the record. Hear is the case where the petitioner applied for sanction of a building plan for construction of a G + 3-storeyed building at Premises No.Bowbazar, Haberly Kolkata. construction Admittedly, 4, was two sanctioned pla...


Sep 02 2013

Smt. Baishali Gupta and Others Vs. Calcutta Metropolitan Development A ...

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Sep-02-2013

ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE APO No.134 of 2013 WP No.349 of 2002 SMT. BAISHALI GUPTA AND OTHERS Versus CALCUTTA METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & OTHERS BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASIM KUMAR MONDAL Judgement: September 2, 2013 For Appellant : Mr.Tapas Kumar Bhattacharyya Mr.Partha Chakraborty. For State-Respondent: Mr.S.Ganguly. For KMd.Mr.P.S. Basu Mr.S.Talukdar. : . Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, J. : By judgment and order dated March 5, 2013, the Honble Single Judge of this Court dismissed Writ Petition No.349 of 2002 holding that it involved disputed questions. Thus, His Lordship granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum for establishing their rights. Under the West Bengal Land Requisition and Acquisition Act, 1948 [ West Bengal Act II of 1948).plot No.4041 and an area of 0.145 acre [excluding the southern portion].of plot No.4042 was acquired. The writ petitio...


Sep 02 2013

Belliss India Limited Vs. Siddhi Refoils and Industries Pvt Ltd.

Court: Kolkata

Decided on: Sep-02-2013

1 ORDER SHEET G.A.No.2508 of 2013 APOT No.400 of 2013 C S No.89 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE BELLISS INDIA LIMITED Versus SIDDHI REFOILS AND INDUSTRIES PVT LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE MRINAL KANTI CHAUDHURI Date :2. d September, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Malay Ghosh, Mr.Ravi Kapoor And Mr.Atish Ghosh, ld. Advocates For the appellant. Mr.Ahin Chowdhury with Mr.Avinash Kankani And Mr.Soumava Ghosh, ld. Advocates For the respondent. The Court :- There will be an order in terms of prayer (a) of the petition. The learned Judge placed the matter for hearing upon affidavits. As and by way of interim arrangement, His Lordship asked the plaintiff to make the balance payment coupled with a direction upon the respondent to furnish bank guarantee as per the contract. The defendant has come up before us. Mr.Malay Ghosh, learned Counsel appearing for the defendant, would contend, Commission should 1 not be done without p...


  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial