Kolkata Court December 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.
Jagmohan Kejriwal and Ors. Vs. Ashrant Bhartia and Anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-16-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE Present : THE HONBLE JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.G.A.No.3059 of 2014 T.S.No.18 of 2012 In the goods of; Sajani Devi Bhartia, deceased Jagmohan Kejriwal & ORS.versus Ashrant Bhartia & Anr. For the plaintiffs:- Mr.Dhruba Ghosh; Adv.Mr.Anirban Roy; Adv.Mr.C.M.Ghorawat; Adv.Mr.Souvik Kanti Chakraborty; Adv.For the defendants:- Mr.S,N, Mitra; senior Adv.Mr.Sabyasachi Choudhuri; Adv.Mr.Sarbapriya Mukherhee; Adv.Mr.Sanjiv Trivedi; Adv.Mr.Ravitej Chilumari; Adv.Heard On:- 05.12.2014 Judgement On:- 16.12.2014 I.P.MUKERJI, J. A short question arises for consideration in this application. The plaintiff, in a contested testamentary suit, to obtain probate of the alleged last Will and Testament of Sajani Devi Bhartia, wants an order from this court that the two attesting witnesses to the Will be examined on commission. These two attesting witnesses are: (a) Ajay Bhargava, Partner, Khaitan & Co., Advocates, 1105 Ashoka Estate...
R.P. Techvision (I) Private Limited Vs. official Liquidator and Anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-16-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Original Side Present : The Honble Mr.Justice Ashim Kumar Banerjee And The Honble Mr.Justice Ashis Kumar Chakraborty APO444of 2014 CP39of 2009 And APO442of 2014 CS74of 2008 SST Media Private Limited and R.P.Techvision (I) Private Limited versus Official Liquidator & Anr. Appearance: Mr.S.N.Mookherjee, Senior Advocate Mr.Ratnanko Banerjee, Senior Advocate, Mr.Kuldeep Mallick, Advocate Mr.Rahul Karmakar, Advocate ..For appellant Mr.Tilak Bose, Senior Advocate Mr.D.N.Sharma, Advocate Mr.Shaunak Mitra, Advocate Mr.Gourav Khaitan, Advocate Ms.Debjani Chatterjee, Advocate .For Respondent No.2 Ms.Ruma Sikder, Advocate .For Official Liquidator Heard On:- December 05, 2014. Judgement On: - December 16, 2014 Ashis Kumar Chakraborty, J. These two appeals arise out of the orders dated May 14, 2013 and October 30, 2014 respectively passed by the learned Company Judge in the proceedings for disclaimer of the property being a flat comprising ...
Sanatan Merchants Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Narpat Bokadia
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-15-2014
C.R.C.C.1 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Contempt) Original Side SANATAN MERCHANTS PVT.LTD.Versus NARPAT BOKADIA BEFORE: The Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.MANJULA CHELLUR The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 15th December, 2014. For the Appellant : Mr.Mr.Mr.Ms.Mr.Utpal Bose. Sr.Advocate with Deepnath Roychowdhury, Souvik Majumdar, Tannistha Lahiri and Kishor Kumar Chakra, Advocates For the Respondent : THE COURT : Heard learned counsel for the complainant. Complainant has approached this Court seeking initiation of proceeding against the respondent/alleged contemnor for committing criminal contempt. It is necessary to narrate facts relating to the above complaint in order to understand whether the reliefs sought by the complainant could be accorded. A suit came to be filed being C.S.5 of 2011 by the present complainant against the respondent-defendant. The claim pertains to supply of certain goods to the defendant. So far as the suit claim, as could be as...
Raj Sekhar Agarwal and Anr. Vs. Pragati 47 Development Ltd. and Ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-12-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE GA3592OF2013WITH GA3345OF2013WITH CS319OF2013RAJ SEKHAR AGARWAL & ANR. -VS.PRAGATI47DEVELOPMENT LTD.& ORS.BEFORE: THE HONBLE JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE For the petitioner (in GA3592: Mr.Ranjan Deb, Sr.Adv.of 2013) & respondent Nos.12, Ms.Madhu Priya, Adv.13 and 14. For respondent No.11 : Mr.Anubhav Singa, Adv.Ms.Anshuwala Bansal, Adv.For plaintiff/petitioner (in GA3345of 2013) : Mr.Jishnu Saha, Sr.Adv.Mr.Sohail Haque, Adv.Mr.P.K.Jhunjhunwala, Adv.For respondent Nos.1,2 and4) : Mr.Ratnanko Banerjee, Adv.Mr.Aniruddha Roy, Adv.For respondent Nos.3,7,8 &9) : Mr.Siddharta Banerjee, Adv.Mr.Victor Dutta, Adv.Heard On : 12th and 25th September, 2014 Judgment On : 12/12/2014 Arijit Banerjee, J. (1) This is an application taken out by the defendant Nos.12, 13 and 14 for rejection of the plaint of CS No.319 of 2013 as against the said defendants or alternatively for expunction of the names of the said defendants from th...
Bijon Kumar Mallick and Ors. Vs. Associated Builders Corporation and A ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-12-2014
In the High Court At Calcutta Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Original Side GA1020of 2013 With CS464of 1981 Bijon Kumar Mallick & ORS.-vs.Associated Builders Corporation & Anr. Before : The Honble Justice Mr.Arijit Banerjee For the petitioner : Mr.Suddhasatva Banerjee, Adv.Mr.Sautosh Kumar Ray, Adv.Ms.Bitika Kaur, Adv.For the intervener (Angad Marchants PVT.Ltd.) : Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Sr.Adv.Mr.Soumya Roy Chowdhury, Adv.Ms.Radhika Singh, Adv.Ms.Sayauti Nandy, Adv.Heard On : 28/08/2014 & 16/09/2014 Judgment On : 12/12/2014 Arijit Banerjee, J.: (1) The entire dispute in the present application appears to revolve around the issue of car parking at Premises No.12 Dr.U.N. Brahmachari St. Kolkata-17 (hereinafter referred to as the said premises).The said premises is a multi-storied building with several flats. The plaintiffs are owners/occupants of Flat Nos.7B and 6B of the said premises. The petitioners being Aloke Kr. Somani and his wife Manjushree Somani claim to be assignees of Flat ...
Geeteecee Engineers and Constructors Vs. Alstom Power Boilers Services ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-11-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Original Side Before: The Honble Justice Debangsu Basak C.S. No.317 of 1997 Geeteecee Engineers & Constructors Vs. Alstom Power Boilers Services Limited For the Plaintiff : Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Sabyasachi Chowdhury, Advocate Rajarshi Dutta, Advocate Uday Goswami, Advocate S. Das, Advocate For the Defendant : Ms. Nairita Datta Chowdhury, Advocate Mr. Surajit Sen, Advocate Hearing concluded on : October 29, 2014 Judgment on : December 11, 2014 DEBANGSU BASAK, J.The plaintiff claims compensation on account of breach of a contract committed by the defendant. The parties entered into a contract in which the plaintiff agreed to erect and provide assistance to the defendant for commissioning of electrostatic precipitator and its accessories in Madhya Pradesh. The work was agreed to be completed within 180 days from the date of handing over of the site. The plaintiff claims that the defendant is guilty of breaches which caused delay...
Modern Malleables Ltd. Vs. Nuova Elettromeccanica Sud. S.P.A
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-11-2014
ORDER SHEET AP NO.855 OF2013GA NO.3851 OF2014GA NO.3778 OF2014IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE MODERN MALLEABLES LTD.Versus NUOVA ELETTROMECCANICA SUD. S.P.A BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 11th December, 2014. Mr.R.Banerjee, senior advocate, Mr.S.Chowdhury, Mr.V.V.V.Sastryfor petitioner. Mr.T.Bose, senior advocate, Mr.S.Banerjee, Mr.S.Roy, Mr.A.Sinha, Mr.R.Mukherjeefor respondent. The Court :- GA3851of 2014 and GA3778of 2014 are treated as on the days list. Two parties are involved. One is Indian, Modern Malleables Ltd.The other is Italian, Nuova Elettromeccanica Sud. S.P.A.Modern Malleables LTD.moved a section 9 application in this court [AP No.6 of 2012].It was on the basis of an agreement dated 3rd March, 2009 stated to be executed in Italy, between the parties. It allegedly contained an arbitration clause, which is clause 9. The section 9 application was entertained by this court on the assumption that the arbitration ...
Bharat Coking Cola Ltd. Vs. Mangal Majhi and Ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-10-2014
Form No.J(2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE Present : The Hon'ble Mr.Justice Banerjee And The Hon'ble Mr.Justice Ashis Kumar Chakraborty APO No.12 OF2014Arising out of WP No.677 OF2011BHARAT COKING COLA LTD.versus MANGAL MAJHI & ORS.For the Appellant : Mr.Kalimuddin Mondal (Advocate) Heard on : December 9, 2014. Judgment on : December 10, 2014. ASHIS KUMAR CHAKRABORTY, J.Yesterday, we heard the matter. Despite repeated calls, none appeared for the appellant. Hence, after hearing Mr.Mondal, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents, we kept it for judgment today to enable Mr.Subrata Ganguly, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant to argue. Today, when the matter is called on, Mr.Mondal informs this Court, Mr.Ganguly has duly been informed. Despite such information, Mr.Ganguly is not present. Hence, we proceed to deliver the judgment. This appeal, at the instance of the Bharat Coking Limited, arises out of an order dated July 29, 2013 pa...
The Boardof Trustees for the Port of Cal Vs. Amiya Industries Pvt.Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-10-2014
ORDER SHEET CS287of 1996 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE THE BOARDOF TRUSTEES FOR THE PORT OF CAL Versus AMIYA INDUSTRIES PVT.LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 10th December, 2014. Appearance: Mr.S.Roy Chowdhury, Adv.Mr.Arindam Mukherjee, Adv.The Court: Plaintiff seeks to recover a sum of Rs.20,32,416/- from the defendant on account of loss and damages suffered by the plaintiff at the instance of the defendant. The plaintiff invited tender for construction of a storage shed on Coal Berth at Haldia Doc Complex on January 19,1991. The defendant participated in such tender. The defendant was awarded the contract. A work order was issued on April 22, 1991. The work order required the completion of the work within fifteen months from the date of the work order. According to the plaintiff, the defendant did not commence any work. The defendant was given a notice to commence work immediately on June 17, 1991. The defendant i...
Bhartia Steel and Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dina Nath Parolia and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-09-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Extra Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Original Side Before: The Honble Justice Debangsu Basak E.O.S. No.58 of 1987 Bhartia Steel & Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dina Nath Parolia & Anr. For the Plaintiff : Mr. Arindam Mukherjee, Advocate Mr. Ashok Kumar Awasthi, Advocate Mr. Aishwarya Kumar Awasthi, Advocate For the Defendants : Mr. Haradhan Banerjee, Advocate Mr. Debabrata Banerjee, Advocate Ms. Somali Mukhopadhyay, Advocate Hearing concluded on : December 03, 2014 Judgment on : December 09, 2014 DEBANGSU BASAK, J.The plaintiff seeks eviction of the defendant from the suit premises. The plaintiff claims that, by a registered lease dated March 25, 1970 the plaintiff granted lease of its steel rolling business to the defendant No.1. The defendant No.1 having committed various breaches of such lease, the plaintiff through its Advocates letter dated December 24, 1979 called upon the defendant No.1 to vacate the suit premises on expiry of April 30, 1980. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »