Kolkata Court October 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.
Hi Temp Filters Private Limited Vs. Tecpro Systems Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-29-2014
ORDER GA No.3049 of 2014 CS No.341 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction HI TEMP FILTERS PRIVATE LIMITED Versus TECPRO SYSTEMS LIMITED BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date: 29th October 2014. Appearance: Mr.Anirban Ray, Advocate Ms.M.Chowdhary, Advocate Ms.N.Jalan, Advocate Md.S.N. Pyne, Advocate ...for plaintiff/petitioner. COURT: application. In spite of notice, none appears to oppose this In fact, on an earlier occasion, this court directed the petitioner to serve a further notice upon the defendant. Such notice was accordingly served and the defendant appears to have received the notice on 24th September 2014. The claim in the suit is arising out of price of goods sold and delivered. The petitioner claims that a sum of Rs.26,57,114/- is due on account of principal sum being the value of the goods sold and delivered to the defendant. It is stated that the Mr.defendant has acknowledged its debts. Anirban Ray, learned counsel appearing on be...
M/S. Index Suppliers (P) Ltd. and anr. Vs. State Bank of India
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-29-2014
GA No.2543 of 2014 CS No.312 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.INDEX SUPPLIERS (P) LTD.& ANR. Versus STATE BANK OF INDIA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 29th October, 2014. Appearance Mr.Anubhav Sinha, Adv.Mr.R.S.Tiwari, Adv.Mr.J.N.Manna, Adv.Mr.D.Banik, Adv.Mr.S.Das, Adv.The Court : The plaintiffs have filed the suit subsequent to the filing of an application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 by the State Bank of India against the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs in the suit have stated as plaint that a sum of Rs.33 crore is recoverable from the State Bank of India by the plaintiff No.1. Of the various heads of claim, a sum of Rs.17 crore has been claimed as and by way of loss of reputation and goodwill. A reading of the plaint would show that the plaintiffs admitted the various difficulties it had faced in running its establishment. However, it is stated that t...
Bijoy Chand Mullick Vs. Chameli Dutta and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-29-2014
ORDER SHEET GA No.3205 of 2014 With CS No.363 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE BIJOY CHAND MULLICK Versus CHAMELI DUTTA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 29th October, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Swapan Mullick, Adv.Mr.Somnath Das, Adv.Mr.Svishek Banerjee, Adv.The Court: In spite of service upon the defendant nos.7 and 10 the said defendants are not represented. The defendant no.12 is represented. The plaintiff claims to be a co-sharer of a family dwelling house being premises no.279B, Rabindra Sarani, Calcutta. The plaintiff states that in his individual capacity he is facing various difficulties to enjoy the undivided share of the joint properties forming the subject matter of the suit. The plaintiff is of advanced age and is not being allowed to properly enjoy his undivided share in the joint property. The plaintiff has indicated in the petition the particulars of such difficulties being faced by the plaintiff by rea...
M/S. Bata India Ltd. Vs. Sri Sagar Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-29-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE Present : The Honble Justice Soumen Sen A.P.No.5 of 2013 M/S.BATA INDIA LTD.versus Sr.SAGAR ROY For the petitioner : Mr.Mr.Mr.Mr.Anindya Kr. Mitra, Sr.Adv., Jishnu Saha, Sr.Adv., Swatarup Banerjee, Biplab Majumdar. For the respondents : Mr.Ratnanko Banerjee, Sr.Adv., Mr.Probal Kr. Mukherjee, Sr.Adv., Mr.Rajat Dutta, Mr.Lokenath Chatterjee, Mr.Prashant Kr. Tripathi. Heard on :25.04.2014,02.05.2014,01.07.2014, 30.07.2014, 06.08.2014 Judgment on : 29th October, 2014 Soumen Sen, J.:- The petitioner has filed this application for setting aside of an award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act).The arbitration proceeding is arising out of a tripartite settlement arrived at between the parties on 17th February, 2005. The learned Arbitrator in the said reference had also passed an interim award which is, however, not subject matter of challenge in t...
Sm. Durga Bala Dhur and ors. Vs. Smt. Kalpana Dhur and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-29-2014
ORDER SHEET GA2932of 2014 With CS426of 2001 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SM. DURGA BALA DHUR & ORS.Versus SMT. KALPANA DHUR & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 29th October, 2014. Mr.R.L.Mitra, Adv.Ms.Priyanka Dhar, Adv.Mr.Debjyoti Basu, Adv.Mr.Tapas Saha, Adv.Mr.S.Dewanji, Adv.The Court:- This is an application seeking extension of time to comply with the order dated March 19, 2014. By the order dated March 19, 2014, the defendants were allowed to purchase the property at a consideration of Rs.87 lakhs. The conveyance was directed to be executed within ten weeks from the date of the order. The defendants have failed to put any sum in terms of order dated March 19, 2014. The defendants have failed to have the conveyance executed within ten weeks from March 19, 2014. The time to comply with the order dated March 19, 2014 was extended on June 27, 2014 for a period of three weeks from the date of the said order. The o...
Senbo Engineering Limited Vs. New Era Enterprises and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-29-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE APOT582OF2014GA3246of 2014 WITH CS298of 2013 SENBO ENGINEERING LIMITED Versus NEW ERA ENTERPRISES & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.MANJULA CHELLUR The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 29th October, 2014. Mr.Niloy Sengupta, Advocate Mr.Arik Banerjee, Advocate Mr.Sourav Mondal, Advocate for appellants Mr.Supratim Laha, Advocate Mr.Tanmoy Roy, Advocate for respondent 1. The Court :- This is an appeal against an order dated 25.08.2014 whereby the learned Single judge revoked the leave granted under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent, 1865 and returned the plaint for being presented before the appropriate Court having jurisdiction. The suit was filed for recovery of certain amounts for works done and for declaration that some of the bills were illegal and null and void. It would appear from the plaint that the plaintiff had entered into an agreement with the defendant No.1 for design and construction of u...
Swapan Kumar Saha Vs. the State Trading Corporation of India Limited a ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-29-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE APOT573OF2014GA3220of 2014 WITH CS201of 2011 SWAPAN KUMAR SAHA Versus THE STATE TRADING CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.MANJULA CHELLUR The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 29th October, 2014. Mr.Suman Dutt, Advocate Mr.Sankarsan Sarkar, Advocate Mr.Soumava Ghosh, Advocate Mr.D.Abedin, Advocate Mr.D.Mukherjee, Advocate for appellant Mr.Shib Shankar Banerjee, Advocate Mr.Arik Banerjee, Advocate for respondents The Court :- Heard learned Counsel for the appellant/defendant and we have gone through the impugned order dated 27th August, 2014. According to learned Counsel arguing for appellant the plaint does not disclose cause of action and also the question of limitation was never raised by the defendant for dismissal of the suit under Order 7 rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure but learned Judge has considered limitation issue as well. In other words the defendant p...
Suresh Tulshan, Trustee of K.P. Foundation and ors. Vs. Marco Polo Res ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-29-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE APOT576OF2014GA3228of 2014 WITH CS221of 2013 SURESH TULSHAN, TRUSTEE OF K.P.FOUNDATION & ORS.Versus MARCO POLO RESTAURANT PVT.LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.MANJULA CHELLUR The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 29th October, 2014. Mr.Jishnu Saha, Advocate Mr.S.Singhvi, Advocate ..for appellants Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Sr.Advocate Mr.Soumava Ghosh, Advocate .for respondent The Court :- Admittedly the appellant herein was a lessee of the premises in question bearing No.24, Park Street, Calcutta which was sublet to the respondent herein. During the pendency of the eviction suit for delivering a vacant and peaceful possession of the premises an application came to be filed seeking a direction against the defendant/respondent to pay off the rent they were paying till April 2013 as occupation charges along with 15% of the enhanced rent as promised by them apart from proportionate reimbursement of municipal ta...
Ashok S. Soni and ors. Vs. Kolkata Municipal Corporation and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-29-2014
APOT594of 2014 G.A.3284 of 2014 G.A.3285 of 2014 W.P.680 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Original Side ASHOK S. SONI & ORS.Versus KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.MANJULA CHELLUR The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 29th October, 2014. For the Appellants : Mr.Arunabha Ghosh, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Sourav Mondal, Advocate For the respondents : Mr.Alok Kumar Ghosh with Ms.Piyali Sengupta, Advocates THE COURT : For the reasons set out in the application for condonation of delay, delay of 37 days in preferring the appeal is condoned. The appellant-writ petitioners who were somewhat successful before learned single Judge are before us. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellants having submitted tender, they may be permitted to take part in the tender process to be held today at 12 Oclock (29-10-2014) but the appeal has to be kept pending 2 for disposal on merits. Having regard to the above subm...
Binay Opto Electronics Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Central ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Oct-28-2014
GA No.2365 of 2014 WP No.201 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE BINAY OPTO ELECTRONICS PVT.LTD.& ANR. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX (APPEALS-I).KOLKATA & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 28th October, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Agnibesh Sengupta, Advocate for the petitioners The Court: By an order dated 30th April, 2013 in the above writ, this Court had directed the petitioner to furnish a bank guarantee for Rs.32 lakhs in favour of the Registrar, Original Side, within ten days from the date of the order. Upon furnishing of the bank guarantee within the aforesaid time limit, there would be unconditional stay of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals-I).By an order dated 15th May 2013 the earlier order was corrected so that the period of ten days was to be read as a period of fifteen days. On 16th May 2013 the time to furnish the bank guarantee by the petitioners was extended till 28t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »