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.
Artistery House Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Morgan Milton Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2013
ORDER SHEET EC No.237 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ARTISTERY HOUSE PVT.LTD.Versus MORGAN MILTON PVT.LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 26th September, 2013. Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury, Adversus for the petitioner Mr.Reetobrata Mitra, Mr.Soumya Ray Chowdhury, Mr.Abhijit Sarkar, Adversus for the respondent The Court : By this execution application the petitioner seeks to execute an eviction decree. Although an appeal was filed and an order was passed on 24th August, 2012 but in spite of such order the judgment-debtor has not made payment of the occupation charges. This therefore entitles the decree-holder to execute the decree. The only defence taken on behalf of the judgment-debtor is that an appeal is pending adjudication. The said flat at present has been sublet to third parties. Therefore while passing an order the said two facts ought to be considered. Having considered the submission of the parties...
Sreejaya Bhattacharjee Godfrey and anr. Vs. Shreejaya Tea and Industri ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2013
ORDER SHEET G.A.2968 of 2013 With C.S.26 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE SREEJAYA BHATTACHARJEE GODFREY & ANR. Versus SHREEJAYA TEA & INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date: 26th September, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Reetobroto Mitra, Adv.Ms.Sarbopriya Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Rajesh Upadhyay, Adv. for the plaintiff no.1 Mr.R.Bachawat, Sr.Adv.Ms.H.Chakraborty, Adv.Mr.P.Chowdhury, Adv.Ms.S.Saha, Adv. for the plaintiff no.2 Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Adv.Ms.R.Kajaria, Adv.Mr.J.Chowdhury, Adv.Mrs.S.Sharma, Addv. Mr.S.Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Arijit Ghosh, Adv. for the respondent no.4 The Court: In a suit for framing a scheme for management and affairs of the defendant no.1 and restraining the defendant Nos.2 to 4 from operating the bank accounts so also disposing of the shares of the defendant no.1, this application has been filed for interim reliefs. In the said suit G.A.300 of 2013 was filed and orders passed. The said ord...
Vs. Kolkata Municipal Corporationand ors.Respon
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2013
ORDER SHEET Wp No.689 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE KIRTI NARAYAN VAJPEYI Petitioner Versus KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.Respondent BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA Date : 26th September, 2013. For Petitioner : Mr.Biswarup Bhattacharya, Advocate Mr.Sanjoy Bose, Advocate Ms.Tapati Chatterjee, Advocate For added Respondent No.7: Mr.A.K. Chatterjee, Sr.Advocate Mr.Som Nath Saha, Advocate For K.M.C. : Mr.Biswajit Mukherjee, Advocate Mr.Debangshu Mondal, Advocate Mr.Gopal Das, Advocate For State : Ms.Sipra Majumdar, Advocate Ms.Prativa Ghatak, Advocate The Court : This writ petition is filed by making several allegations Authority. against the added respondents as well as the Municipal It is alleged that the added respondents are making unauthorised construction at the Premises Nos.5 and 9, Mullick Street, Kolkata without any sanctioned plan and in the process of such construction damage has been caused to the p...
Smt. Indira Chunder Vs. Laxmi Charan Law and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2013
Form No.J.(2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Original Side Present : The Honble Mr.Justice Ashim Kumar Banerjee And The Honble Justice Dr. Mrinal Kanti Chaudhuri A.P.O.No.271 of 2000 C.S.No.394 of 1971 SMT. INDIRA CHUNDER versus LAXMI CHARAN LAW & ORS.For the Appellant : Mr.Arindam Mukherjee, Advocate Mr.Avirup Chatterjee, Advocate For the Respondent No.2 : Mr.Reetabrata Mitra, Advocate Mr.Aniruddha Mitra, Advocate Mr.Dwaipayan Mitra, Advocate Ms.Debjani Mitra, Advocate For Legal Heirs of Respondent No.1 : Mr.Pradyut Kumar Das, Advocate Receiver : Ms.Monika Ghosh, Advocate Heard on : September 17, 2013. Judgment on : September 26, 2013. ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE, J. One Madhab Charan Law was seized and possessed of various properties. He died on September 27, 1970 leaving him surviving his widow and other children. The widow died within two months thereafter. In September, 1971 his heirs filed a suit for partition. The parties subsequently settled the suit by fil...
Amrit Fresh Pvt Ltd Vs. Sri Bablu Ghosh and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2013
ORDER SHEET GA NO.2912 OF 2013 APOT NO.475 OF 2013 EC NO.288 OF 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE AMRIT FRESH PVT LTD Versus Sr.BABLU GHOSH & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE DR.MRINAL KANTI CHAUDHURI Date : 26th September, 2013. Mr.S.N.Mookherjee, Senior Advocate Mr.Ratnanko Banerji, Advocate Mr.Aniruddha Ray, Advocate, Mr.R.K.Rai, Advocate Mr.Anumoy Basu, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.A.K.Pal, Advocate Mr.S.Sarkar, Advocate for the respondent no.1. The Court : We have heard the parties. The respondent is a money creditor of the respondent no.2, namely, Medow Feed Speciality Limited, on account of supply of milk. We are told, the respondent no.1 is holding a decree for Rs.67 lakhs and odd as of date against the respondent no.2. The respondent no.2 could not pay off the liability towards the respondent no.1. They could not pay off the secured creditor being Indian Bank who got the property sold to the...
Monoranjan Roy Vs. Hdfc Bank Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2013
ORDER SHEET GA No.3002 of 2013 CS No.351 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE MONORANJAN ROY Versus HDFC BANK LTD.& ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 26th September, 2013. Mr.Mr.Mr.Mr.Soumendra Nath Mukherjee, Sr.Adv Anirban Roy, Adv.Soumabho Ghose, Adv.Sanjay Basu, Adv.for the plaintiff The Court : In a suit for a declaration that plaintiff is not associated with the business of the defendant No.2 since 13th October, 2010 this application has been filed for interim reliefs. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner continued as a director of the defendant No.2 till 13th October, 2010 when he submitted his resignation as a director of the said respondent No.2. Form 32 was also filed by the defendant No.2 with the Registrar of Companies. Therefore, the petitioner on and from 13th October, 2010 ceased to be a director of the defendant No.2. In May, 2013 notice under Section 13(2) of the 2002 Act has been issued by...
Syed Mohammed Raza and anr. Vs. Kolkata Municipal Corporation and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2013
WP No.703 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE Syed Mohammed Raza & Anr. Versus Kolkata Municipal Corporation & ORS.Before: The Honble Justice Jyotirmay Bhattacharya Date: 26th September 2013 Appearance: Mr.Md.Farhauddin, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.L.C. Behani, Advocate Mr.N.C. Behani, Advocate for KMC Mr.Murari Chakraborty, Advocate Mr.Nadeem Sulaiman, Advocate Mr.Anal Kr. Ghosh, Advocate Ms.Sunita Guha, Advocate for the prvate respondent The Court: Let a supplementary affidavit which is filed on behalf of the petitioners in Court today be kept with the record and the same be treated as a part of the writ petition. Let it be recorded that copies of the said supplementary affidavit have been served upon the learned Advocates of the respondents. The petitioners claim that they were the recorded owners of premises No.33, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai Road, Kolkata. Their names were recorded as owners of the said premises in the municipal records. T...
Sreejaya Bhattacharjee Godfrey and anr. Vs. Mkb(Asia) Private Limited ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2013
ORDER SHEET G.A.2967 of 2013 With C.S.25 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE SREEJAYA BHATTACHARJEE GODFREY & ANR. Versus MKB(ASIA) PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date: 26th September, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Reetobroto Mitra, Adv.Ms.Sarbopriya Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Rajesh Upadhyay, Adv. for the plaintiff no.1 Mr.R.Bachawat, Sr.Adv.Ms.H.Chakraborty, Adv.Mr.P.Chowdhury, Adv.Ms.S.Saha, Adv. for the plaintiff no.2 Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Adv.Ms.R.Kajaria, Adv.Mr.J.Chowdhury, Adv.Mrs.S.Sharma, Addv. Mr.S.Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Arijit Ghosh, Adv. for the respondent no.4 The Court: In a suit for framing a scheme for management and affairs of the defendant no.1 and restraining the defendant Nos.2 to 4 from operating the bank accounts so also disposing of the shares of the defendant no.1, this application has been filed for interim reliefs. In the said suit G.A.300 of 2013 was filed and orders passed. The said orders were challeng...
Tata Capital Ltd. Vs. M/S. Suresh Construction Co. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2013
ORDER SHEET EC No.404 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction TATA CAPITAL LTD.Versus M/S.SURESH CONSTRUCTION Co.& ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 26th September, 2013. Mr.Dipaloke Majumdar for the decree holder. Mr.S.Ganguly, Mr.P.K. Mitra for the judgment debtORS.The Court : By this execution application the petitioner seeks to execute the award dated 23rd July, 2010. No application has been filed under Section 34 of the 1996 Act. Therefore, the decree holder is entitled to execute the said award as a decree under Section 36 of the 1996 Act. In column 7 of the Tabular Statement a sum of Rs.6,65,774.41p is sought to be executed against the judgment debtors along with interest at 18% per annum from 24th February, 2010 till realisation. This prayer has been opposed by Counsel for the judgment debtors and although the judgment debtors are desirous of making payment in instalments reduction is sought in the rate of interest. Having consi...
M/S. P.M.Enterprise (Cal) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Employees State Insurance ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2013
ORDER SHEET WP No.68 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.P.M.ENTERPRISE (CAL) PVT.LTD.Versus THE EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 26th September, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Saumya Majumdar, Advocate The Court: The petitioner is a contractor. It does certain works for CESC LTD.on being awarded contracts to this effect. According to the writ petitioner, they are not covered by the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 for the principal reason that the writ petitioner and not anybody else controls their employees. The principal employer, CESC Ltd., was not covered under the said act, it was submitted. Nevertheless a show cause notice was issued by ESI authorities to the petitioner on the ground of non-deposit of contribution under the ESI Act, 1948. An order was passed upholding the show cause. The writ petitioner challenged it by way of a writ application in this Court (WP No.456 of 2012...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »