Kolkata Court January 2014 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.
Mani Square Ltd. Vs. Planet M Retail Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-2014
AP No.48 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction MANI SQUARE LTD.Versus PLANET M RETAIL LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 22nd January, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Abhrojit Mitra, Adv.Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury, Adv.for the respondent The Court : The respondent is not represented despite service. The petitioner points out that notwithstanding the exclusive forum selection clause embodied in clause 21 of the primary agreement between the parties executed on March 17, 2009, a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been carried by the respondent to the Alipore Court. It is the petitioners contention that the Alipore Court may not have jurisdiction to entertain the petition. Prima facie, it appears that all petitions filed under Part I of the 1996 Act pertaining to this arbitration agreement have to be carried to this Court in view of the forum selection clause in the principal agreement. The agreement between th...
Beltas Merchants Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Indian Fibres Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-2014
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ACO NO.159 OF2013APO NO.278 OF2013BELTAS MERCHANTS PVT.LTD.Versus INDIAN FIBRES LTD.& ORS. ACO NO.160 OF2013APO NO.279 OF2013YASHDEEP TREXIM PVT.LTD.Versus INDIAN FIBRES LTD.& ORS. ACO NO.161 OF2013APO NO.280 OF2013MILLENNIUM SECURITIES PVT.LTD.Versus INDIAN FIBRES LTD.& ORS. CP NO.355 OF1997CA NO.314 OF2009CA NO.326 OF2009CA NO.145 OF2009CA NO.931 OF2010CA NO.1079 OF2011CA NO.945 OF2011CA NO.894 OF2011CA NO.245 OF2012CA NO.453 OF2013CA NO.326 OF2009CA NO.874 OF2011WP NO.12609 [W].2013 JUGAL KISHORE YADAV AND GOURIPORE Co.LTD.[IN LIQN.]. GA NO.2809 OF2009GA NO.3099 OF2009GA NO.2868 OF2009GA NO.824 OF2013GA NO.901 OF2013GA NO.1690 OF2013CS NO.308 OF2009LOOMTEX ENGINEERING PVT.LTD.Versus JITENDRA NATH CHAUBEY & ORS. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 22nd January, 2014. Mr.S.K.Kapoor, senior advocate. Mr.S.N.Mitra, senior advocate. Mr.P.Chatterjee, senior advocate. Mr.D.N.SharmaappeaRs...
Apeejay Shipping Ltd. and anr. Vs. Bharati Shipyard Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-2014
TA No.11 of 2014 T No.23 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Apeejay Shipping LTD.& Anr. Versus Bharati Shipyard LTD.& ORS.Before: The Honble Justice I.P.MUKERJ.Date: 22nd January 2014 Appearance: Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Advocate Mr.D.Mondal, Advocate Mr.Jishnu Choudhury, Advocate Mr.Soumabho Ghose, Advocate for the plaintiffs/petitioners The Court: On grave urgency being cited by learned Counsel for the plaintiffs, leave was granted to him to present the plaint at 2 pm today and to move an interim application, immediately thereafter, ex parte. The plaintiffs had lent and advanced monies to the fiRs.and eighth defendants. The sum that became payable on or about 20th January 2014, was a little over Rs.50 crores, on account of the said loan. The second and third defendants are group companies of the fiRs.defendants. They have substantial shares in the sixth defendant. These defendants represented that these shares would be pledged in favour of the plaint...
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-2014
ORDER SHEET CP NO.630 OF2013CA NO.390 OF2013IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF: NAVRATRA MARKETING PVT . LTD.& ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 22nd January, 2014. MR.D.N.SHARMA,ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONING CREDITOR MS.SANTA MITRA, ADVOCATE FOR CENTRAL GOVERNMENT The Court : The only objection raised by the Central Government is regarding the share exchange ratio. This is an objection which could have been raised by a shareholder but no such objection has been raised by any shareholder nor has it been alleged that the scheme is unfair to the shareholders of the transferor company. The shareholders have agreed to the non-convening of meeting and, therefore, have accepted the share exchange ratio. Even after advertisement of the application for sanction of scheme no shareholder of the transferor company has raised objection to the scheme. Therefore, the objection raised by the Central Government cannot be sustained. The Central G...
Asiatic Oxygen Ltd. and anr. Vs. the Dy. Comm. of Income Tax, Circle4,
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-2014
WP No.25 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ASIATIC OXYGEN LTD.& ANR. Versus THE DY. COMM. OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, KOLKATA & ANR. Appearance Mr.R.Bharadwaj, Adv.Petitioners Ms.Smita Das Dey, Adv.Respondents BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date : 22nd January, 2014. The Court : The bone of contention of the petitioners before this Court is that the authorities have not passed a speaking order in terms of the guidelines indicated in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) LTD.versus Income Tax Officer & ORS.Reported in 259 ITR19by the Supreme Court. The Apex Court in the above judgment laid down a guideline that when a notice under Section 148 of the said Act is issued, the assessee has to file a return and may also seek for reasons for issuance of the said notice. After the reasons are communicated, the assessee shall be entitled to file an objection which is required to be disposed of by a speaking order. The petitioners say that...
Dipak Kumar Mukherjee Vs. S. Narsing Rao and anr
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-2014
ORDER SHEET CC No.134 of 2013 -withWP No.110 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Civil Jurisdiction (Contempt) ORIGINAL SIDE DIPAK KUMAR MUKHERJEE Versus S. NARSING RAO & ANR The Hon'ble JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE Date : 22nd January, 2014. Appearance : Mr.Swapan Kumar Dutta, Advocate. Mr.Dipankar Das Gupta, Advocate. for the petitioner. Mr.Lakshmi Gupta, Senior Advocate. Mr.Kalimuddin Mondal, Advocate. for the contemnor Nos.1 and 2 The Court : The instant contempt action has been brought by the petitioner alleging wilful disobedience of an order of this Court passed on 5th April, 2010 in WP No.110 of 2010. In the order which was interim in nature, I stayed the operation of memorandum of charges which was brought against the petitioner on 10th December, 2009 and all consequential proceedings originating from the memorandum of charges were also stayed until further order of this Court. Admitted respondent-employer, position Coal India is that Limited, subsequently, has memorandu...
Zion Steel Ltd. Vs. Subtleweigh Electric (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE C.P. 326 OF2013Zion Steel Ltd. vs Subtleweigh Electric (India) Pvt. Ltd. BEFORE The Honble Justice HARISH TANDON Appearance: Mr. S. Medda, Adv. Mr. M. Kakrania, Adv. Mr. Adil Rashid, Adv. Judgment On :22. 01.2014 HARISH TANDON, J : The point involved in this company petition is whether the issuance of C Form under the Central Sales Tax Act constitutes an acknowledgment of the subsisting liabilities as well as the jural relationship giving fresh life of limitation under Section 18 of the Limitation Act. Admittedly on 08.10.2007 the Company placed in order upon the petitioning creditor to provide the automation system for Bar Rolling Mill, Wire Rod Mill and Garret Coiler including D.C. Drive and other allied materials at a price which would be evident therefrom. The purchase order contains the various heads viz., price, delivery, late delivery penalty, payment, guarantee and installation and erection of the ...
Hindustan Lever Limited Vs. C. I. T., Kolkata Ii and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-2014
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction [Income Tax ].ORIGINAL SIDE ITA No.48 of 2003 HINDUSTAN LEVER LIMITED Versus C.I.T., KOLKATA - II & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE TAPASH MOOKHERJEE Date : 22nd January, 2014. For Appellant : Mr.J.P.Khaitan, Senior Advocate with Mr.S.Bose, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.P.K. Bhowmick, Advocate The Court : This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 27th September, 2002 by which the contention of the Revenue was upheld and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed in respect of both the assessment years 1991-92 and 1992-93. There were naturally two appeals. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Tribunal, the asessee has come up in appeal. The appeal was admitted by an order dated 23rd December, 2003 on the basis of the following substantial questions of law: I. Whether the expenditure on account of municipal tax, repairs and insurance being allowable directly under secti...
Rajat Das Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. and Another
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-2014
Debasis Bhattacharya, Member: This appeal is directed against the judgment/Order dated 30.05.2012, passed by the Ld. District Forum, Siliguri, in Case No. 84/S/2011. By the impugned judgment/Order , the Ld. District Forum has allowed the case on contest in part against the OP and dismissed the same against the proforma OP and directed the OP to pay to the Complainant a sum of Rs. 4,328/- within 45 days of the order, failing which the award will carry interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of the order. Being dissatisfied and aggrieved with the same, the Complainant thereof has preferred this appeal. The case of the Complainant is that he is a practicing lawyer at the Siliguri Sub“Divisional Court and for his own requirement, he purchased Maruti 800 AC Car bearing registration No. WB/74K-8989 in the year 2006, and the same has been insured with the OP for the period from 28.09.2009 to 27.09.2010. On 28.06.2010, at night, the said car met with an accident and it became badly damaged. On ...
Avijit Swarnakar Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Prev.), Kolkata
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-22-2014
Dr. D.M. Misra, J. 1. These two miscellaneous applications are filed on 14th March, 2013 along with their appeal seeking condonation of delay of 221 days. 2. On the first date of hearing i.e. 12.07.2013, the ld. Advocate for the Applicant, has submitted that as the impugned Order-in-Original No.11/Cus/CC(P)/WB/2012 dated 07.05.2012 passed by Commr. of Customs (Preventive), West Bengal, Kolkata, had not been communicated/received by the Applicant, therefore, they had approached the Department for supply of a copy of the order on 7th January, 2013 for filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The Superintendent of Customs, declined to accept the said letter dated 7th January, 2013 and informed the Applicant that the order dated 7th May, 2012, had been dispatched to them by Speed Post. However, on persuasion by the Applicant, the Superintendent of Customs, issued an attested copy of the said impugned order on 22nd January, 2013. Consequently, the Appeal was filed on 14th March, 2013. 3. It ...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »