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.
Paridhi Merchandise Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Debi Kamal Trust Estate and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-2014
A.P.No.1460 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE PARIDHI MERCHANDISE PVT.LTD.& ORS.Versus DEBI KAMAL TRUST ESTATE & ORS.Appearance Ms.Ajeya Mitra, Adv.Mr.Koushik Chatterjee, Adv.Mr.Samarendra Nath Biswas, Adv.Mr.D.K.Sharma, Adv.Mr.Hirak Kr. Mitra, Sr.Adv.Ms.Suchismita Ghosh, Adv.Mr.Ramendra Prasad Banerjee, Adv.Mr.D.K.Jain, Adv.Mr.Arik Banerjee, Adv.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 15th January, 2014. The Court : The respondent Nos.8 and 9 are neither parties to the arbitration agreement nor parties to the reference and, as such, their names should be deleted from the array of parties. The petitioneRs.who are the claimants seeking specific performance of an agreement to purchase an immovable property, allege delay and bias to seek the removal of the arbitrator appointed by consent of the parties in couRs.of the request under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The primary grounds urged are that ...
Jvl Agro Industries Ltd. Vs. the Owners and Parties Interested In
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-2014
ORDER SHEET GA No.1 of 2014 AS No.1 of 2014 T No.354 of 2013 TA No.142 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Admiralty Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE JVL AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD.Versus THE OWNERS & PARTIES INTERESTED IN THE VESSEL MT TITAN VISION V.C21TC/15 BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 15th January, 2014. Mr.R.K.Chowdhury, Adv.for the plaintiff Mr.K.R.Thaker, Adv.for the defendant The Court : Frivolous objections have been raised by the plaintiff through counsel. The objections raised initially on 8th January, 2014 by the plaintiff was that the original letter issued by the P & I Club was not before the Court and therefore no orders of release ought to be passed. This was on mentioning notice issued by the defendant to the plaintiff. For reasons beyond the control of the Court, the matter could not be entertained on 13th January, 2014. Hence the matter is taken up for consideration this day. This day counsel for the plaintiff submits that the authenticity of the signatory of the...
Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengalii, Calcutta Vs. Middleton Inve ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-2014
ORDER SHEET ITA No.196 of 1999 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, WEST BENGAL-II, CALCUTTA Versus MIDDLETON INVESTMENT & TRADING Co.LTD BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE TAPASH MOOKHERJEE Date : 15th January, 2014. Mr.S.B.Saraf, Advocate for the Appellant Mr.J.P.Khaitan, Sr.Advocate, Ms.Anupa Banerjee,Adv.for the Respondent The Court : The income of the assessee arising from different heads was as follows: 1. Loss in the purchase and sale of shares (-) Rs.10,83,091/- including interest liability attributable to it II. Income from the business of granting (+) Rs.2,10,218/- loans, advances etc.III. Short term capital gains in sale of shares (+) Rs.6.425 (as per computation filed) IV Income from other sources (as per (+) Rs.10,13,798/- computation filed) The assessee was interested in contending and, in fact, contended as follows: the loss in purchase and sale of shares is to the tu...
Vvf (India) Limited Vs. Jyothy Laboratories Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-2014
AP No.1562 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE VVF (INDIA) LIMITED -VersusJYOTHY LABORATORIES LIMITED Appearance: Mr.S.N.Mookherjee, Sr.Adv.Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Adv.Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury, Adv.Mr.Sarvapriya Mukherjee, Adv...for the petitioner. Mr.Pratap Chatterjee, Sr.Adv.Mr.Prithwiraj Sinha, Adv...for the respondent. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : January 15, 2014. The Court : This second petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed for the purpose of effective implementation of the subsisting order of October 9, 2013 as modified by the appellate order of October 24, 2013 on the previous petition, A.P.No.1016 of 2013. The subsisting order of October 9, 2013 restrains the respondent, its servants, agents and assigns from allowing any person other than the petitioner to manufacture the products listed in Annexure-C to the agreement of December 21, 2009 without the previous leave ...
Sinha Multilevel Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Prasad Chandra Paul
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-2014
AP No.46 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SINHA MULTILEVEL MARKETING PVT.LTD.-VersusPRASAD CHANDRA PAUL Appearance: Mr.Arindam Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Saurabh Maitra, Adv.Mr.Gauran Purkayastha, Adv...for the petitioner. Mr.Dipak Basu, Sr.Adv.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : January 15, 2014. The Court : The petitioner seeks a direction on the receiver appointed by an order of this Court on a previous petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 on December 8, 2009 to put up boards on the property in possession of the receiver to ensure that the land is not encroached on. A feeble objection is taken as to jurisdiction. Such objection is utterly unmeritorious since a previous Section 9 petition has been entertained and disposed of by this Court without any objection as to jurisdiction being evident from the relevant order. In view of Section 42 of the 1996 Act, this is the only Court which can n...
Srei Equipment Finance Private Limited Vs. Sharan Raj Singh and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-2014
AP No.1059 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED Versus SHARAN RAJ SINGH & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 15th January, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Satarup Banerjee, Adv.Mr.Tirthankar Nag, Adv.The Court : The respondents are represented and say that though an amount in excess of Rs.15 lakh is due only on account of defaulted instalments, the respondents are unable to make any immediate payment. The respondents had previously put in a sum of Rs.5 lakh by the end of December, 2013. Since a substantial sum is due and no immediate payment is forthcoming, Ms.Durba Bandyopadhyay, Adv., Bar Association Room No.5, is appointed as Receiver at an initial remuneration of 1000 GM to take possession of the asset if a further payment of Rs.5 lakh is not made by the respondents to the petitioner by way of a demand draft or bankers cheque, not being a personal cheque, within a period of four weeks from date. ...
Ava Pyne and ors. Vs. Biva Pyne
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-2014
1 ORDER SHEET GA No.2382 of 2013 APO No.347 of 2008 CS No.163 of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE AVA PYNE & ORS.Versus BIVA PYNE BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 15th January, 2014. Appearance: Mr.S.N. Mookherjee, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Suman Dutt and Ms.Subhra Das Mr.Kausik Chowdhury, ld. Advocates For the petitioner Mr.S.Sengupta, ld. Advocate For the respondent. The Court :- Under the consent decree the petitioner is entitled to Rs.1.8 crore that was kept in deposit with the Registrar, Original Side of this Court as per order in this appeal so disposed of by a consent decree. Mr.Sourav Sengupta, learned Advocate appearing for the respondent would raise two objections. According to Mr.Sengupta, they were supposed to get the letter of attornment for the property already conveyed to them. Such letter of attornment is yet to be handed over by the petitioner. The second objection raised by Mr.Sengup...
Harbinder Kaur Vs. Landt Finance Limited and anr
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-2014
1 ORDER SHEET GA No.3773 of 2013 APOT No.588 of 2013 AP No.272 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE HARBINDER KAUR Versus L&T FINANCE LIMITED & ANR BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 15th January, 2014. Appearance: Mr.K.C.Garg with Mr.Harpal Singh Ld. Advocates for the appellant. Mr.Paritosh Sinha, ld. Advocate For the respondent. The Court :- This appeal would relate to a hire purchase claim of the respondent against the original borrower, who unfortunately died in an accident. It is alleged by his mother the appellant abovenamed, the financier by taking advantage of the situation, forcibly took possession of the assets. Mr.Garg appearing for the appellant would refer to the photograph to show that parts are being removed from the machine. The learned Judge by His Lordships order dated October 8, 2013 recorded the fact that the father of the petitioner wanted to purchase the property as it is for ...
M/S. Karunko, Jamshedpur Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and Servic ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-2014
Dr. D.M. Misra, J. 1. This is an Application seeking waiver of predeposit of Service Tax of Rs.1,37,629/- and equal amount of penalty imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2. At the outset, ld. Advocate for the Applicant submits that the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed their appeal under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for non-compliance with the direction of predeposit of the entire amount of service tax. The ld. Advocate also submits that the issue relates to the eligibility of Notification No.08/2005-ST dated 01.03.2005. He submits that the raw materials were received for job work under the provisions of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and the supplier had discharged the appropriate duty on the processed materials, subsequently. 3. Ld. AR for the Revenue fairly accepts that the issue has not been decided on merit and he has no objection if the matter is remanded to the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) for decision on merits, taking into consideration all the is...
M/S. Telco Construction Equipment Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-15-2014
D. M. Misra, J. 1. This is an application for waiver of predeposit of penalty of Rs.10.17 lakhs imposed under Rule 13 (2) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 2. At the outset, the ld.Advocate appearing for the Applicant, has submitted that the appeal has not been decided on merit by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), but dismissed for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. He submits that the cenvat credit of Rs.10.17 lakhs had been allowed by the adjudicating authority, however, penalty of Rs.10.17 lakhs has been imposed on the Applicant along with interest. It is his submission that the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has stayed the recovery of the said penalty amount by his Order dated 29.03.2012 and there was no direction for any predeposit, but the appeal was dismissed on 04.09.2012 for failure to predeposit of the directed amount within one month. He submits that the aforesaid orders are contrad...
- ‹ Prev
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- Next ›
- Last »