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.
Smt. Kanti Devi Bhutoria and ors. Vs. Smt. Gopa Sinha and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL SIDE GA No.88 of 2014 CS349of 1991 WITH GA No.89 of 2014 CS348of 1991 SMT. KANTI DEVI BHUTORIA & ORS.Versus SMT. GOPA SINHA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 17th January, 2014. Mr.S.S.Sarkar,Sr.Advocate appeaRs.Mr.Abhrajit Mitra,Advocate appeaRs.Mr.Raja Basu Chowdhury,Advocate appeaRs.Mr.Arindam Mukherjee,Advocate appeaRs.Mr.Manju Agarwal,Advocate appeaRs.Mr.Bajrang Manot,Advocate appeaRs.The Court :- The present applications are appeared to be an offshoot of a suit filed by Smt. Suchandra Bhutoria being CS No.280 of 2012 against the brother of late Arun Bhutoria. The suit along with the suit filed by the defendants have been substantially heard and, in fact, the plaintiffs in this suit have already commenced argument. The prayers made in the petition are, in no way, relevant in deciding the said suit. If the plaintiff No.1(b) wants to make a separate representation, it would be open for her to do so, but, in any event, she woul...
Mr. Sauvik Kundu, Ad Vs. …for the Petitioner
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
ORDER SHEET C.P.No.336 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE VIVEKANANDA FORGING ( INDIA ) LTD -ANDKANODIA METALS PVT.LTD BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 17th January, 2014. The Court Mr.Shaunak Mitra, Mr.Sauvik Kundu, Adversus for the petitioner Mr.Mohit Gupta, Mr.Raj Kumar Gupta, Adversus for respondent company : In this winding up application the petitioning creditor sought for payment of Rs.32,16,864 on account of price of goods sold and delivered. Bills were raised and for non-payment of the outstanding, a notice under Section 434 of the 1956 Act was served on the company and the same was also received. No reply has been given to the statutory notice in spite of receipt. Therefore the petitioning creditor is entitled to maintain the winding up application. On behalf of the company it has been submitted by counsel that an agreement has been reached between the parties for a total sum of Rs.38,16,864/- which is to be paid in 10 equal m...
Ajay Kr. Ghosh Vs. Sribas Dutta and Others
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
Mridula Roy, Member: The instant appeal is directed against the judgement and order dated 22.03.2012 passed by Ld. District Forum, North 24 Pgs. in C.C. Case No. 279/2009 allowing the same in part on contest with cost against the O.P. Nos. 1 to 3 and exparte against the O.P. No. 4 without cost directing the O.Ps to execute and register the Deed of Conveyance in respect of the shop room in question in favour of the Complainant upon receiving the balance consideration money as per agreement dated 27.07.2006 within two months from the date of order, i.d. the Complainant may execute the order through the Forum, further directing the O.P. Nos. 1 to 3 to pay a sum of Rs.1,000/- towards litigation cost to the Complainant within two months from the date of order. Being aggrieved by this order the Complainant has preferred the instant appeal. Case of the Complainant (Appellant herein) in brief, is that he was a tenant in respect of a shop room having an area of 126 sq. ft. situated with the lan...
Debrupayan Housing Co. Ltd. Vs. Bandana Barai and Another
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
Kalidas Mukherjee, President This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by Learned District Forum, Barasat, North 24-Parganas in case no.CC 256 of 2011 allowing the complaint and passing the order as follows: œHence ordered, that the complainant be and the same is allowed on contest with a cost of Rs.3,000/- against the O.P. O.P is directed to hand over possession of the plot as described in the schedule of agreement to sale dated 09.02.07 and to execute sale deed and register the same within one month from the date of this order, failing which for each days delay a sum of Rs.400/- per day shall be assessed as interest for non compliance and disobeyance of the Forums order and till execution and registration of the sale deed and said assessed total amount shall be deposited by the O.P to State Consumer Welfare Fund. O.P is also imposed a penalty of Rs.25,000/- for adopting unfair trade practice in this case only to deprive the bonafide consumer to transfer the ...
Sri Ashok Chakraborty and Another Vs. the Sr. Post Master General, Ser ...
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
Jagannath Bag, Ld. Member: These two appeals arise out of one and the same Order , dated 20.04.2012, of the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kolkata Unit-II in CDF / Unit “II / CC No. 769 / 2009 whereby Ld. Forum below allowed the complaint on contest with the cost against OP Nos. 1-6 and exparte against OP No. 7 and dismissed against OP No.8. Both the appeals are taken up together for adjudication keeping in view the fact that there was one original complaint which , briefly stated , was as follows: The Complainants, Sri Asok Chakrobarty and Smt Uma Chakrobarty , had jointly opened three MIS Accounts (No.8017575 dt. 12.11.2005 , No. 8017853 dt. 25.11.2005 and No. 8019375 dt. 11.02.2006) by depositing Rs. 1,05,000/- for each at Serampur Head Post Office, Hooghly , in November 2005 and February 2006 through an agent, namely, Smt. Minati Bhattacharya. One RD Account bearing No. 4005937 was also opened on 08.11.2005 by the said Complainants through the same agent . T...
The New India Assurance Company and Another Vs. Sugiya Devi and Others
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-17-2014
Sri Debasis Bhattacharya, Member: Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment , dated 08.08.2012 passed by the Ld. District Forum, Burdwan in Case No. 123/2009, the OP Nos. 1 and 2 thereof have preferred this appeal. By the impugned judgment, the complaint has been allowed on contest , and the Insurance Company has been directed to pay the sum assured of Rs. 3,00,000/- along with interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of filing the complaint till actual payment of the entire amount and also to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards compensation and Rs. 2,000/- for litigation cost. The case of the Complainant is that her deceased husband , Goutam Keyat during his lifetime was working as an Agent of the Proforma OP in its Asansol Branch and got himself insured by the OP No.2 for the period from 15.06.2000 to 14.06.2015 of a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- , and the Complainant was made nominee thereof, being policy No. 4751220001799 / E.No.47-30852. He met with an accident while returning to his h...
M/S. Ore Cast (India) Vs. Sunrise Ore and Minerals Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-2014
A.P.No.20 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.ORE CAST (INDIA) Versus SUNRISE ORE AND MINERALS PVT.LTD.Appearance Mr.Soumya Ray, Adv.Mr.Ritzu Ghosal, Adv.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 16th January, 2014. The Court : The primary ground urged for setting aside the award is that the arbitrator failed to take into account the petitioners contention that a substantial amount claimed to have been paid by the respondent to the petitioner as advance was allegedly paid by one Rotomac Global Private Limited. The parties entered into an agreement under which the petitioner was to supply iron ore fines to the respondent. The claim in the arbitral reference was for refund of the excess amount paid by the petitioner or refund of the advance payment to the extent that supplies were not effected by the petitioner to the respondent. One of the grounds urged in defence to the claim was that the respondent had apparently not pa...
Sas Investments Fiduciary Ltd. Vs. the Official Liquidator, High Court ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-2014
ORDER SHEET CA No.654 of 2007 With CP No.553 of 1999 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction IN THE MATTER OF: BHARAT MARGARINE LTD.[IN LIQN.].AND SAS INVESTMENTS FIDUCIARY LTD.Versus THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR, HIGH COURT, CALCUTTA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 16th January, 2014. Appearance: Mr.R.Bachawat, Advocate, Mr.S.Roy Chowdhury, Adavocate, Mr.D.N. Roy Chowdhury,Advocate and Ms.Aruna Ghosh, Advocate. for the applicant. Mr.S.Sanyal, Advocate with Mr.S.Bhanj, Advocate for the SBI. Mr.H.Das, Manager SBI Mr.R.S.De, Advocate. for WBIDC. Mr.K.C.Garg, Advocate with Ms.S.Agarwal, Advocate..for HydroCo.Products India PVT.LTD.Mrs.R.Sikdar, Advocate. for Official Liquidator. The Court :-Without going into the issue of pilferage while the assets was in the custody of the WBIDC and the Official Liquidator, the only issue that is being decided is with regard to the payment of the secured creditors and, in particular, SBI, Stressed Assets Management Branch. The one time...
Magma Fincorp Limited Vs. Ramji Dass Darshan Kumar Ltd. and
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-2014
AP No.33 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE MAGMA FINCORP LIMITED -VersusRAMJ.DASS DARSHAN KUMAR LTD.& ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Appearance: Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury, Adv...for the petitioner. Date : 16th January, 2014. The Court : The respondents are not represented despite service. The petitioner claims that a sum in excess of Rs.96.56 lakh is due upon the termination of the agreement, including an amount in excess of Rs.17.54 lakh on account of defaulted instalments. The petitioner claims that the machinery and equipment which form the subject-matter of the agreement between the parties cannot be located and the petitioner does not seek the immediate appointment of a receiver over the machinery and equipment. According to the petitioner, the respondents have executed a deed of assignment by which the debtors of the fiRs.respondent company are to make over payment of any sum that may be due to the fiRs.respondent...
Magma Fincorp Limited Vs. Kandla Earthmovers Pvt. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-16-2014
AP No.1585 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE MAGMA FINCORP LIMITED -VersusKANDLA EARTHMOVERS PVT.LTD.& ANR. Appearance: Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury, Adv...for the petitioner. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 16th January, 2014. The Court : The respondents are not represented despite deemed service. The petitioner claims that a sum in excess of Rs.71.19 lakh is due upon the termination of the agreement, including an amount in excess of Rs.14.26 lakh on account of defaulted instalments. The petitioner claims that the three Volvo buses which form the subject-matter of the agreement between the parties cannot be located and the petitioner does not seek the immediate appointment of a receiver over the buses. According to the petitioner, the respondents have executed a deed of assignment by which the debtors of the fiRs.respondent company are to make over payment of any sum that may be due to the fiRs.respondent company to the ...