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.
Smt. Jyotsna Mullick and ors. Vs. Kamales Mallick and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-24-2013
ORDER SHEET G.A.974 of 2013 With C.S.222 of 2001 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE SMT. JYOTSNA MULLICK & ORS.Versus KAMALES MALLICK & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date: 24th September, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Lal Ratan Mondal, Adv. for the plaintiffs/petitioners Mr.Suchayan Banerjee, Adv. for Gupta Enclave PVT.LTD.Mr.Kuldip Mallick, Adv. for the receiver The Court: In a suit for partition this application has been filed for interim reliefs. The petitioners seek partition of immovable properties belonging to them jointly. One of such properties is situate at Prasanna Kumar Tagore Street, Kolkata-700006. The said property is comprised in premises Nos.26/2A, 26/2/1A, 26/2/3A and 26/2/4A, Prasanna Kumar Tagore Street. The said premises in a dilapidated condition and an order of demolition has also been passed by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation. The parties are unable to restore the said premises as it is beyond their means and, the...
Alwaye Properties and Finance Limited Vs. Forum Projects P. Ltd
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-24-2013
ORDER SHEET APOT NO.474 OF 2013 GA NO.2911 OF 2013 CS NO.137 OF 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ALWAYE PROPERTIES & FINANCE LIMITED Versus FORUM PROJECTS P. LTD (SUNSUM PROPERTIES PVT.LTD.) & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE DR.MRINAL KANTI CHAUDHURI Date : 24th September, 2013. Mr.Anirban Ray, Advocate Mr.Chayan Gupta, Advocate Mr.S.K.Kundu, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.Dhruba Ghosh, Advocate Mr.Aniruddha Mitra, Advocate Mr.Ashok Kumar Basu, Advocate Mr.Ajay Gaggar, Advocate for the respondent. The Court : By putting great emphasis and with all his eloquence Mr.Anirban Ray, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant, could bring home his points to the notice of the Court. Yet, the Court is unable to appreciate, possibly it is the Courts shortcoming. To the Court, the appeal is absolutely frivolous. The parties are fighting a civil litigation, inter alia, on arrears of Corporation taxes. Earlier, ...
M/S.Shambhu Nath and Brothers and ors. Vs. Usha Shriram Enterprises Pv ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-24-2013
ORDER SHEET GA NO.29O6 OF 2013 CS NO.327 OF 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.SHAMBHU NATH & BROTHERS & ORS.Versus USHA SHRIRAM ENTERPRISES PVT.LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 24th September, 2013. MR.PRATAP CHATTERJEE,SR.ADVCOATE, MR.RANJAN BACHAWAT, MR.S.BOSE, MR.G.K.RAY, MR.S.JANA,ADVOCATES FOR PETITIONERS The Court : In a suit for a decree of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from infringing the plaintiffs trade mark TOOFAN., this application has been filed for interim relief. The case of the petitioners is that it is prior user of the label TOOFAN. and is registered in the label TOOFAN. since August 1993. It has come to the knowledge of the petitioners that the respondent is marketing and selling its electrical items including fans under the label TOOFAN. since April 2012. As a registered trade mark holder, the petitioners have the exclusive right to use the label TOOFAN., hence orders be passed a...
Ranabir Roy and anr. Vs. Subarna Bose and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-24-2013
ORDER SHEET GA No.2947 of 2013 CS No.344 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction RANABIR ROY AND ANR. Versus SUBARNA BOSE AND ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 24th September, 2013. Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury, Mr.Satadeep Bhattacharya, Mr.R.Upadhyay for the petitioneRs.The Court : In a suit for passing off action this application has been filed for interim reliefs. The case of the petitioners is that it runs a school of hotel management under the name NIPS and therefore, created a portal which can be accessed through its website www.nipsgroup.in. It is the exclusive user of the word NIPS since 1993. Recently it has come to know that the respondents have created a similar website and the only difference is the word co which has been inserted between nipsgroup.in. Persons accessing the website of nipsgroup.co.in are diverted to the portal of the respondents. By creation of the said portal the respondents are passing off themse...
Uttam Bauri Vs. Coal India Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-24-2013
ORDER SHEET WP No.1016 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE UTTAM BAURI Versus COAL INDIA LTD.& ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 24th September, 2013. Appearance: Mr.U.S.Agarwal, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.Amit Halder, Advocate for the respondents The Court: Some factual questions are required to be determined for providing a complete answer to the issues raised in this writ application. The Court, sitting in its writ jurisdiction, is unable to resolve the issues because disputed questions of fact are involved which are not possible for this Court to adjudicate upon. The dispute is this. Arun Bauri was an employee with Eastern Coalfields LTD.He expired on 23rd May, 2012. More than ten years prior to his death, on 17th March, 2002, his wife, Bisakha married Aruns brother, Uttam Bauri, the writ petitioner. According to Mr.Amit Halder, learned Counsel for the respondents, this marriage was registered under the Special Ma...
……………plaintiff Vs. Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-23-2013
1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Jurisdiction Original Side G.A.No.583 of 2013 G.A.No.669 of 2013 C.S.56 of 2013 G.A.No.938 of 2013 C.S.87 of 2013 In the Matter of : HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LTD.Plaintiff versus RECKITT BENCKISER (INDIA) LTD..Defendant G.A.No.937 of 2013 C.S.90 of 2013 G.A.No.942 of 2013 C.S.92 of 2013 In the Matter of : RECKITT BENCKISER (INDIA) LTD.Plaintiff versus HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LTD..Defendant For the Hindustan Unilever : Mr.Pratap Chatterjee, Senior Advocate Mr.S.N.Mookerjee, Senior Advocate with Ms.Mousumi Bhattacharyya, Mr.Debnath Ghosh, Mr.A.Bansal, Ms.N.Jhunjhunwala, Advocates For the Reckitt Benckiser (India) LTD.: Mr.C.M.Lall, Advocate with Mr.S.Bose, Mr.P.Bose Ms.Nancy Ray, Advocates Heard on :06. 08.2013 & 7.08.2013 Judgment on :23. d September, 2013 I.P.Mukerji, J. Two companies are litigating against one another. One is Hindustan Unilever Ltd., in short Hindustan., the other is Reckitt Benckiser (India) LTD.in short Reckitt.Four advertiseme...
Bharati Das Vs. Aloke Sen and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-23-2013
ORDER SHEET GA No.2341 of 2013 PLA No.88 of 1976 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE GOODS OF : SUBODH GOPAL BOSE (DEC) AND IN THE MATTER OF : BHARATI DAS versus ALOKE SEN & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 23rd September, 2013. Mr.Sakya Sen, Ms.Nilanjana Adliya, Adversus for the petitioner Mr.R.L.Mitra, Ms.Priyanka Dhar, Adversus for respondent No.4 Mr.Rabi Prasad Mookerjee, Ms.Shreya Ghosh, Adversus for Joint Receivers The Court : This is an application filed by Shipping Corporation Co-operative Credit Society Ltd., one of the lessees in respect of the Puri property of the estate. By order dated 8th July, 2013 the rent and maintenance charge in respect of the portion occupied by the applicant herein was increased on and from the 1st July, 2013 as on 30th June, 2013 the lease had expired by efflux of time. This application is for modification of the said order dated 8th July, 2013 and the only reason for such modifi...
Sabitri Devi Vs. Coal India Limited and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-23-2013
ORDER SHEET WP No.848 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SABITRI DEVI Versus COAL INDIA LIMITED & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 23rd September, 2013. Appearance: Mr.U.S.Agarwal, Advocate Mr.R.N.Majumndar, Advocate Mr.Partha Basu, Advocate Mr.N.K.Roy, Advocate The Court: The facts of this case are substantially different from WP No.1035 of 2011 (Ashrafi Mallah versus Coal india LTD.& Ors.).an unreported decision of this Court made on 12th September, 2013. There is no dispute at all that the writ petitioner made an application in terms of the Special Female Retirement Scheme of Eastern Coalfields LTD.on 28th November, 2002. The scheme had very limited operation upto 31st December, 2013. It appears from paragraph 5 at pages 6 to 7 of the affidavit in opposition of Eastern Coalfields LTD.that the scheme, according to the company, was working injustice, not serving its purpose and was proposed not to be followed as would ...
Manju Chakravarti and anr. Vs. Sri Sudhir Kr. Chakraborty and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-23-2013
1 ORDER SHEET GA No.3178 of 2012 APOT No.466 of 2012 EOS No.7 of 1993 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE MANJ.CHAKRAVARTI & ANR. Versus Sr.SUDHIR KR. CHAKRABORTY & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE MRINAL KANTI CHAUDHURI Date :23. d September, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Samit Talukdar, Sr.Advocate with Mr.A.Roy, Mr.Vivek Jhunjhunwala and Mr.S.Mitra, Advocates for the appellant Nos.1 & 2. Mr.Ganguli, Advocate for appellant no.2 Mr.Utpal Bose, Mr.Siddhartha Chatterjee And Mr.Nilabja Seal, Advocates for respondent no.1 Mr.Debnath Ghosh, Advocate for respondent no.4. The Court :- From the judgment and order impugned we find, the learned Counsel, who appeared for the appellants, did not make any submission at all particularly, the issues, which are now agitated before us by Mr.Talukdar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant. although involve it The core contention of the appellants would be, was a practically partition ...
Apeejay Private Limited Vs. Hindusthan Steel Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-23-2013
ORDER SHEET CS No.1075 of 1964 With CS No.1971 of 1965 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE APEEJAY PRIVATE LIMITED Versus HINDUSTHAN STEEL LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date :23. d September, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Joydip Kar, Adv.Mr.Sourav Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Dhruba Ghosh, Adv.Mr.C.L.Singh, Adv.The Court: It appears from record that the following documents although exhibited but they were not marked as exhibits in the record and accordingly the following documents should be marked as Exhibits and proper endorsement shall be made on the said documents by the Court Officer: Exhibit Nos.16, X-4, X-4/1, X-4/2, X-4/3, X-4/4 and X-4/5. It is submitted that the following Exhibits have not been made available to the parties during inspection. Exhibit Nos.20, 35 to 39, 47 to 47/2, 52, 55, 57, 82, 92, 98, 104, 107 to 109, 120 to 129, R, S, A, A-2, and A-3. The Registrar, Original Side has filed a report dated 12th September, 2013. The purity...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »