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.
Branch Manager Hdfc Bank Ltd. and Another Vs. Subinay Dey
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-31-2014
Kalidas Mukherjee, President. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by Learned District Forum, Alipore, South 24-Parganas in case no.CC 50 of 2010 allowing the complaint with cost of Rs.5,000/- and directing the OPs to pay Rs.3,849/- to the Complainant and issue no due certificate in favour of the Complainant within 30 days from the date of order. The OPs were directed to return the post dated cheques to the Complainant and to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- for the harassment and mental agony of the Complainant and in default of the aforesaid amount the interest @ 9% p.a. shall accrue thereon till realisation. The case of the complainant/respondent, in short, is that he purchased a car by taking loan from the OPs. The EMI was fixed at Rs.6,972/- which was paid till 24/09/09. The car was delivered in January, 2008. Eight blank cheques were delivered to the OPs by the Complainant. On 24/10/09 the OP No.2 with the help of some anti-social elements forcibly reposses...
Frontier Garment Company Vs. Commr of Customs (Port), Kolkata
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-31-2014
DR. I.P. Lal, J. 1. This is an application filed seeking waiver of pre-deposit of Rs.1,50,197/- which was confirmed by the lower adjudicating authority and upheld by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeal). 2. Ld. Advocate submits that above amount was confirmed because the appellant could not submit the certificate of realization of foreign exchange to the Department. Since then the said certificate has been received by them. 3. Ld. A.R. for the Revenue, however, raises the basic objection that the issue is not maintainable in this Tribunal in view of the proviso to Section 129A of the Customs Act, according to which the appellate Tribunal does not have any jurisdiction in respect of an order relating to payment of draw back. The Ld. A.R., therefore, submits that the appeal has been filed to the wrong forum which could have been filed to the Central Government. 4. In the rejoinder, the Ld. Advocate submits that he does not have any objection to file the appeal in the appropriate forum. 5. After...
Humayun Properties Ltd. Vs. Pushpa Dahanayake
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
ORDER SHEET C.S.No.374 of 1999 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE HUMAYUN PROPERTIES LTD.Versus PUSHPA DAHANAYAKE BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date: 30th January, 2014. Appearance: Mr.David Mentosh, Adv.Ms.L.Banerjee, Adv.Ms.S.A.Das, Adv. for the plaintiffs Mr.Malay Kumar Ghosh, Adv.Mr.Debasish Ghosh, Adv. for the defendant Nos.3 & 4. The Court: Leave is granted to the plaintiff to file affidavit as to documents. The cause papers and the documents were in safe custody when the suit was taken up for hearing. The written statement filed on behalf of the added defendant Nos.3 and 4 was not found in the records, so also the affidavit as to documents filed by the defendant Nos.3 and 4. By an order dated March 7, 2002 the Registrar Original Side was directed to keep the cause papers of the suit in safe custody Time was sought for on behalf of the defendant Nos.3 and 4 to prepare the Judges Brief of Documents. Such time is allowed ti...
B.S. Progressive Pvt. Limited Vs. M/S S.G. Sales Corporation and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
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 Mr.Justice Arijit Banerjee G.A.No.175 of 2014 A.P.O.T.No.31 of 2014 C.S.No.452 of 2013 B.S.Progressive PVT.Limited versus M/S S.G.Sales Corporation & ORS.For the Appellants For the Respondents 1,2,3,4 For the Respondents 7 and 8 : Mr.Ranjan Bachawat, Senior Advocate Mr.Debnath Ghosh, Advocate Mr.Subhasish Sengupta, Advocate Mr.Sanjay Kr. Baid, Advocate : Mr.G.D.Bansal, Advocate Mr.A.K.Gandhi, Advocate : Mr.Rudraman Bhattacharya, Advocate Ms.Piyali Sengupta, Advocate Mr.Sarosij Dasgupta, Advocate Ms.Arunima Lala, Adovcate Mr.Supratim Basu, Advocate Heard on : January 22, 2014 Judgment on : January 30, 2014 ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE, J. FACTS The appellant is the user of the mark Austin in its manufacturing and business of plywood and other related products. The appellant would claim, they were having registration under class 19 as would ap...
Kent Ro Systems Ltd and anr. Vs. Sandeep Agasrwal and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
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 Mr.Justice Arijit Banerjee A.P.O.No.355 of 2013 C.S.No.363 of 2013 Kent R-O Systems Ltd & Anr. versus Sandeep Agasrwal & Anr. For the Appellants : Mr.Rudraman Bhattacharya, Advocate Mr.A.P.Agarwalla, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Advocate Mr.Arif Ali, Advocate Heard on : January 21, 2014 Judgment on : January 30, 2014 ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE, J. FACTS From the pleadings and rival contentions the admitted position that we arrive at, would be, as stated hereinafter. Kent R-O systems Limited the appellant, would claim to be well known in the field of water purifier. They are engaged in manufacture of water purifier as per the design duly registered and certified by the appropriate authority. The Patent Office of the Government of India would certify the design that we find from the photograph and the equipment produced i...
Trf Ltd. Vs. Damodar Valley Corporation and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
ORDER SHEET TA No.15 of 2014 T No.35 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE TRF LTD.Versus DAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 30th January, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Jayanta Mitra, Sr.Advocate Mr.Aniruddha Roy, Advocate Mr.O.P.Jhunjhunwala, Advocate Mr.V.V.V.Sastri, Advocate Mr.Nirmalya Dasgupta, Advocate for the petitioner The Court: Leave was granted to learned Counsel for the plaintiff to present the plaint at 2.00 P.M.today and to move an interim application ex-parte, immediately thereafter. Such leave was granted because of urgency shown that the subject two bank guarantees were likely to be invoked by the fiRs.defendant at any time. The prima facie case of the parties will be more fully understood in the presence of the defendants. But the case of the plaintiff/petitioner made out today, in short is that the two subject bank guarantees are sought to be invoked in breach of the terms and condi...
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
ORDER SHEET CP No.594 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF : JESSOP & Co.LTD.-ANDSr.RAVI SANKAR SINGH BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 30th January, 2014. Mr.Mukti Ghosh, Adv.Mr.Asish Kr. Mukherjee, Adv.for the petitioner Mr.Nirmalya Dasgupta, Adv.for the company The Court : This winding up application has been filed after issuance of statutory notice under Section 434 of 1956 Act. A point of demurer has been raised on behalf of the company that Section 434(1)(a) contemplates that a company shall be deemed to be unable to pay its debts only when a demand has been served on the company and delivered at its registered office by registered post. In the instant case the registered office of the company is at 21 & 22, Jessore Road and the delivery has been made at 21 & 28, Jessore Road. Therefore there is non-compliance of the statutory requirement of 434 (1)(a) and the application be dismissed. Some of the claims of the petit...
Shyam Sel and Power Ltd Vs. W.B. Minerals Development and Trading Corp ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
ORDER SHEET T. 31 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SHYAM SEL & POWER LTD Versus W.B.MINERALS DEVELOPMENT & TRADING CORP. LTD & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date : 30th January, 2014. For Petitioner : Mr.Pratap Chatterjee, Sr.Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Mr.Sanjev Kr. Trivedi, Mr.Sarvapriya Mukherjee, Ms.Swati Agarwal, Mr.Sounak Mitra, Mr.Soumabha Ghose, Adv.Adv.Adv.Adv.Adv.Adv.Adv.For Respondents : Mr.Ashok Banjerjee, Sr.Adv.The Court : The agreement, which was entered into between the petitioner and the respondents as far back as on 04.02.08 for supply of the coals to the petitioner firm from the coal blocks allotted to the respondents, contains an arbitration clause for resolution of the disputes. Subsequently a Memorandum of Understanding was entered into on 01/03/2011 wherefrom it is apparent that the Trans Damodar Sector Coal Block is allotted by the Ministry of Coal, Government of India to the respondents for the pur...
idbi Federal Life Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Anuva Ghosal and Another
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
J. Bag, Ld. Member. The present appeal is directed against the Order dated 11.06.2012 of the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressasl Forum, Birbhum , in CF Case No. CC/59/0/2010, whereby Ld. Forum below allowed the complaint on contest against OP No.1 with cost and dismissed on contest against other OPs without any costs . The complaint case, in brief, was as follows: The Complainants son Samrat Ghosal during his life time purchased a flat in the last part of 2009 with a home loan of Rs. 11,83,000/- from IDBI Bank, being the OP/Respondent No.2. The said home loan was insured under the scheme of IDBI Fortis Home Insurance Protection Plan under IDBI Fortis Life Insurance Company Ltd. The sum assured was Rs. 12,11,160/- . The date of commencement of the policy was December, 23, 2009 which was valid for 20 years. On 19.01.2010 the insured Samrat Ghosal having been found lying in an unconscious condition in his flat was taken to MRB Hospital where he was declared brought dead . Jadavpu...
Subhrajit Das Vs. Vindya Project Pvt. Ltd. and Others
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-30-2014
Kalidas Mukherjee, President. This a complaint case wherein the Complainant has stated that he entered into an agreement with the developers, that is, the OP No.1 and 2 for purchase of a flat being no.2B, 2nd floor, Block-II measuring 1132 sq. ft. at 91/9, Bosepukur Road, Ward No.91, KMC, Kolkata, P.S. Kasba, District-South 24-Parganas. The agreement was executed on 21/07/05 by the developers through its Director, Sri Ravi Sankar Agarwal (OP) and also by the land owners, OP Nos.4 to 8 through their constituted attorney, the OP No.2. The total consideration money for the flat and car parking space was fixed at Rs.14,01,800/- out of which the Complainant paid advance amount of Rs.1,67,933/-. Under the said agreement the promoters (OP Nos.1 and 2) received advance amount of Rs.12,61,933/- out of the total consideration of Rs.14,01,800/- in respect of the flat and car parking space. In addition the Director, Sri Ravi Sankar Agarwal received Rs.50,000/- through cheque and Rs.2,46,000/- ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »