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.
L and T Finance Ltd. Vs. Icore Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd. and
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-2014
AP No.1311 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE L & T FINANCE LTD.-VersusICORE IRON AND STEEL PVT.LTD.& ANR. Appearance: Mr.Aniruddha Mitra, Adv...for the petitioner. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : January 21, 2014. The Court : The respondents are not represented despite service of the petition and the supplementary affidavit. The petitioner claims that a sum in excess of Rs.31.89 lakh is due upon the termination of the agreement, including an amount in excess of Rs.4.88 lakh only on account of defaulted instalments. Pursuant supplementary to the affidavit has leave been granted filed. to the petitioner, Paragraph 4 of a such supplementary affidavit indicates that an interim report has been filed by the Serious Frauds Investigation Office after conducting an investigation into the affairs of the respondent company. The petitioner also apprehends that if any delay is made in realizing the petitioners proceed against...
G.S.Fertilisers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Maheswary Ispat Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-2014
CS133of 2013 GA No.2726 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL SIDE G.S.FERTILISERS PVT.LTD.VERSUS MAHESWARY ISPAT LTD.BEFORE : THE HONBLE JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN DATE : 21ST JANUARY,2014. For the plaintiff : Mr.Ajoy Krishna Chatterjee,Advocate Mr.B.Chatterjee,Advocate Mr.Murali Mohan Ray,Advocate For the defendant : Mr.Samrat Sen,Advocate Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury,Advocate Mr.Deepnath Roy Chowdhury,Advocate Mr.Sourav Sengupta,Advocate The Court :-In a summary suit the defendant has filed an application for leave to enter appearance in this suit. The defendant admits that the defendant received the writ of summons on 2nd July,2013, but could not take steps within the stipulated time to enter appearance and file an affidavit refuting the claim of the plaintiff. The applicant states that an Advocate was entrusted to take steps in the matter and all papers were made over to the said Advocate on 4th July,2013. The applicant further states that all steps were taken to prepare an affidavit with...
M/S Roadlines Corporation Pvt Ltd Vs. M/S Reliance Capital Ltd
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE GA No.127 of 2014 AP No.837 of 2013 M/S ROADLINES CORPORATION PVT LTD Versus M/S RELIANCE CAPITAL LTD And GA No.126 of 2014 AP No.838 of 2013 M/S ROADLINES CORPORATION PVT LTD Versus M/S RELIANCE CAPITAL LTD And GA No.128 of 2014 AP No.839 of 2013 M/S ROADLINES CORPORATION PVT LTD Versus M/S RELIANCE CAPITAL LTD And GA No.125 of 2014 AP No.840 of 2013 M/S ROADLINES CORPORATION PVT LTD Versus M/S RELIANCE CAPITAL LTD BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 21st January, 2014. Appearance: Ms.S.Sanyal, Adv.Mr.Sourav Ghosh, Adv.Mr.P.Sinha, Adv.Mr.A.Basu Mullick, Adv.The Court : Sufficient grounds have been made out as to why the petitioner was not represented on January 6, 2014 when AP No.837 of 2013 was dismissed for default. The order dated January 6, 2014 is recalled and the petition is restored to the file. Since the parties had been put on notice, AP No.837 of 2013 is taken up immediately for h...
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-2014
CP No.323 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction IN THE MATTER OF: FEDERATION OF ALL INDIA PETROLEUM TRADERS & ANR. And REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES & ANR. Appearance Mr.Samit Talukdar, Sr.Adv.Mr.Sabyasachi Sen, Adv.Applicants Mr.K.Thakkar, Adv.Mr.A.K.Mishra, Adv.Respondents BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 21st January, 2014. The Court : This application has been filed under Section 560 of the Companies Act, 1956 as the name of the company has been removed from the register of the Registrar of Companies and the applicants herein seek restoration thereof. A preliminary issue of maintainability of this application has been raised as the application has been filed by the Vice-President of the company. From the Articles of Association of the de-registered company and, in particular, Article 59, the de-registered company is to be sued and shall sue in the name of the General Secretary. The said Article remains unamended. Although an authorization letter dated 17th...
Steel Authoritiy of India Limited (Alloy Steel Plant) Vs. State of Wes ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-2014
ORDER SHEET W.P.No.1292 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE STEEL AUTHORITIY OF INDIA LIMITED (ALLOY STEEL PLANT) Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date : 21st January, 2014. Appearance : Dr.S.Chakraborty, Adv.Mr.Abhijit Biswas, Adv. for the petitioner Mr.S.Mukherjee, Adv. for the learned Advocate-General The Court : The petitioners have sought for declaration that the provisions of the West Bengal Tax On Entry of Goods Into Local Areas Act, 2012 and the Rules made thereunder are ultra vires and be declared as null and void. In one of the writ petitions being W.P.11407(W) of 2012 the vires of the provisions of the said Act was also challenged and by a judgment dated 24-06-2013 the Honble Single Bench declared the provisions of the said Act as ultra vires. Mr.Mukherjee, advocate is represented learned Advocate General, submits that the said judgment is carried in an appeal before the Division Benc...
Commissioner of Central Excise, Haldia Commissionarate Vs. Brishti Vin ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-2014
ORDER SHEET GA NO.3236 OF2013APOT NO.538 OF2013APO OF2013WP NO.1524 OF2008IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction [Income Tax].ORIGINAL SIDE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, HALDIA COMMISSIONARATE Versus BRISHTI VINIMOY PVT.LTD.And JOINT COIMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, HALDIA COMMISSIONARATE, PROFORMA RESPONDENT. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA AND The Hon'ble JUSTICE TAPASH MOOKHERJEE Date : 21st January, 2014. For appellant : Mr.R.Bharadwaj, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.J.P.Khaitan, senior advocate with Ms.A.Banerjee, Advocate. The Court : This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 02.08.2013 by which the learned Trial Court set aside the order dated 30.11.2005 passed by the Joint Commissioner of Excise and referred the matter back to him for rehearing subject to deposit of a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- by the writ petitioner before the appropriate authority. Aggrieved by the order the revenue has come up in appeal. Mr.Bharadwaj, learned Advocat...
Amal Kumar Ghosh Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle42 an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-2014
ORDER SHEET ITA No.21 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE AMAL KUMAR GHOSH Versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-42 & ORS BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE TAPASH MOOKHERJEE Date : 21st January, 2014. Mr.R.Bharadwaj, Adv.for Appellant Ms.A.Gutgutia,Adv.for Respondent The Court : This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 30th July, 2010 passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal upholding the contention of the revenue that the Assessing Officer was competent to issue notice under section 143(2) of the I.T.Act for scrutiny even after expiry of the period of three months from the date of filing of the return. The admitted fact is that CBDT issued Circulars no.9 and 10, i.e.for Corporate Assessee and for Non-Corporate Assessee respectively. The relevant provision appearing from Circular No.10 reads as follows: The process of selection of cases for scrutiny for return...
Dr. Amar Krishna Ray and anr. Vs. the Mayor, Kolkata Municipal Corpora ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-2014
ORDER SHEET W.P.No.1267 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE DR. AMAR KRISHNA RAY & ANR. Versus THE MAYOR, KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL Date : 21st January, 2014. For Petitioner : Mr.Soumya Majumder,Advocate For Respondent No.8 : Mr.Pallav Banerjee,Advocate For KMC : Mr.S.K.Debnath,Advocate Mrs.S.Ghosh,Advocate The Court : At the very outset, Mr.Majumder,learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that though several prayers have been made, at this stage, the real challenge is to the order dated 16th July, 2010 passed by the Municipal Building Tribunal rejecting the application for inspection filed on 9th April, 2010. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that as findings are perveRs.and is an abuse of process in the name of demolition proceedings and virtually it becomes a proceedings for regularisation, which is contrary to the provisions of the Kolkata Municipal...
Gippsaero Pty Ltd. Vs. the Commisioner of Customs
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-2014
ORDER SHEET W.P.No.20 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE GIPPSAERO PTY LTD.Versus THE COMMISIONER OF CUSTOMS (AIRPORT & ADMIN) & ORS BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date : 21st January, 2014. For Petitioner : Mr.J.P.Khaitan,Sr.Advocate Mr.P.Khaitan,Advocate Mr.A.Sengupta,Advocate Mr.V.Jhunjhunwala,Advocate For Respondent : Mr.S.B.Saraf,Advocate Mr.S.K.Saha,Advocate The Court : The solitary point raised in this writ petition relates to the action of the customs authorities in invoking the bank guarantee before the statutory period for an appeal having expired. At the time of provisional release of the subject goods, the petitioner furnished a bank guarantee as well as PD Bond with the customs authorities. The petitioner also paid the duty so assessed by the customs authorities together with interest as applicable under the Customs Act. Subsequently, the customs authorities by the order in original dated 18.11.2013 imposed a red...
Nurul Huda Layek Vs. Tapan Kumar Sen and Another
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-21-2014
Mridula Roy, Member: The instant appeal is directed against the judgement and order dated 30.03.2012 passed by Ld. District Forum, Kolkata, Unit “ I allowing the petition of complaint on contest with cost against the O.P. directing the O.P. to execute the deed of conveyance in respect of the premises as shown in the schedule of the petition of complaint after receipt of the balance amount payable by the Complainants to his credit as per two agreements and directing the Complainants to comply the said order. The Ld. District Forum also passed order in respect of the registration cost as well as the allied cost in process of registration to be borne by the Complainants and directed the O.P. to pay compensation of Rs.25,000/- to the Complainants for harassment and mental agony and to pay Rs.5,000/- towards litigation cost to the Complainants within 45 days. Being aggrieved by this order the O.P. has preferred the instant appeal on the ground that the Ld. District Forum acted upon a...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »