Kolkata Court February 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.
Explosive Manufacturers Association, India Vs. Union of India
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-13-2014
ORDER SHEET WP6002005 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE EXPLOSIVE MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION, INDIA Versus UNION OF INDIA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 13th February, 2014. Mr.R.Upadhyay , Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.K.Mondal, Advocate for the respondent Coal India The Court : The writ petitioner No.1 being an association is not represented. The added writ petitioners are present. Persons who seek to also be added as writ petitioners by pending application are also present. The case in this writ petition as urged by the persons interested as aforesaid arises out of an order dated 1st July, 2002 issued by the Chief Materials Manager of Coal India Limited upon its suppliers in the matter of supply of explosive detonators and other accessories from 1st July 2002 onwards. The order directed that supplies from 1st July 2002 onwards should be billed provisionally at the prices of CILs earlier contract of 2001-2002 subject to fi...
Uma Sankar Singh Vs. Secretary, Labour Dept.,govt. of W.B.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-13-2014
ORDER SHEET WP2832005 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE UMA SANKAR SINGH Versus SECRETARY, LABOUR DEPT.,GOVT. OF W.B.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 13th February, 2014. Mr.K.H.Dasan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Partha Bhattacharya, Advocate for the respondent no.3 The Court : The writ petitioner was a workman of National Engineering Industries Limited having its head office in Jaipur. The writ petitioner was posted in the Kolkata office and Agarpara. On 17th March, 1990 the writ petitioner was charge-sheeted and placed on suspension. An enquiry was held regarding the charges levelled against the writ petitioner at Jaipur. On 21st May 1990 the company issued a letter of dismissal of service to the petitioner. From such order of dismissal there was a reference for adjudication of the matter under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947. An award dated 29th April 2004 was made whereby it was held that dismissal from s...
M/S. S. Krishna and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs an ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-13-2014
Dr. I.P. Lal, J. 1. This is an appeal filed against the order dated 14.08.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Bolpur confirming the differential duty of Rs.1,42,09,369/-, imposing redemption fine of Rs.1,25,00,000/- in lieu of the confiscation of the imported goods and penalty of Rs.50.00 Lakhs on the Appellant. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the Appellant filed Bill of Entry No.197/ICD-DGP dated 11.10.2012 and 201/ICD-DGP/2012 Dated 17.10.2012 declaring therein the imported goods as dry nuts (betel nuts provisionally preserved with SO2 at the declared CIF price of US Doller 975 per M.T. (equivalent to Rs.51.53 per Kg.), claiming the classification of the said items under ITC HS Code 08129090 wherein the applicable rate of duty is 30% Basic Customs Duty + 2% Education Cess and 1% SHE Cess and 4% Additional Duty. The goods were of Indonesian origin and shipped from Singapore. In Singapore these goods were fumigated and sulphered. On examination the go...
Vivek Bharadwaj Vs. Vodafone Essar East Ltd. and Others
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
Record is put up for passing Order on the maintainability petition filed by the OP Nos. 1-3 as well as the written objection filed on behalf of OP No. 4. In the present case, the complaint, in brief, is as follows: The Complainant being a customer of Vodafone mobile service provider and having the Vodafone Mobile No. 9830143700, received a bill of Rs. 1,427.92 for the months of July and August, 2013 with the stipulation of payment of the bill by 08.08.2013. Allegedly, the Complainant found on 08.08.2013 morning that there was no connection and the Complainant having immediately contacted the OP No. 1 for knowing the reason for their arbitrary and abrupt action towards disconnection within the stipulated date of payment, was told that his disconnection request had been forwarded for processing, vide registration No. 1386601092. The Complainant, vide his e-mail message dated 8.8.2013, requested the OP service provider to immediately restore the connection, which stood deactivated. It is ...
M/S. Conika Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-12-2014
Dr. D.M. Misra, J. 1. None present for the Applicant. Heard the Ld.A.R. for the Revenue. 2. The present Application has been filed seeking stay of the dues adjudged as mentioned in the CA-3 Application i.e. duty of Rs.1,06,720/-, interest of Rs.1,579/- and penalty of Rs.1,00,000/-. 3. The Ld.A.R. for the Revenue brought to our notice that the Ld.Commissioner(Appeals) has rejected the Appeal filed by the Applicant on the ground that the Applicant could not produce a copy of the Order-in-Original under which the fine and penalty had been imposed. Ld.A.R. further submits that the Applicant was not any time directed to produce the said Order-in-Original by the Office of the Commissioner of Central Excise(Appeals). He also concedes that this is a case, whereby the Ld.Commissioner ought to have given a chance to the Applicant to produce the documents before rejecting their Appeal. He has no objection in remanding the matter to the Ld.Commissioner(Appeals). 4. We find that a...
Poddar Projects Ltd. Vs. Cesc Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
ORDER SHEET GA NOK.372 OF2014WITH CS NO.185 OF1997IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE PODDAR PROJECTS LTD.Versus CESC LTD. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BISWANATH SOMADDER Date : 11th February, 2014. Mr.A.ChatterjeeappeaRs.Mr.S.Ghosh, Mr.S.N.Pyneappear. The Court : Having heard the learned Advocates for the parties and upon perusing the instant application, it appears that the applicant/petitioner is essentially seeking direction from this Court upon the defendant CESC LTD.to install the automatic sprinkler system attached with alarm within the entire area occupied by the defendant CESC LTD.on the second floor of premises no.18, Rabindra Sarani (Poddar Court).Kolkata-700001, in terms of the recommendations of the West Bengal Fire and Safety Services. Perusing the documents annexed to the application, it appears that the Director General, West Bengal Fire and Emergency Services, as far back as on 27th August, 2008, had made certain recommendati...
Srei Equipment Finance Limited Vs. Shree Sudama Krishn
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
AP No.92 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE LIMITED -VersusSHREE SUDAMA KRISHN Appearance: Ms.Sneha Sharma, Adv...for the petitioner. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : February 11, 2014. The Court : Since the respondent is not represented despite service, this second petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 can be disposed of by accepting the offer of Rs.22 lakh received for the asset which cost about Rs.47 lakh in 2012. On the previous petition under Section 9 of the 1996 Act, an order was passed by the appellate Court on September 9, 2013 requiring possession to be taken of the asset. The respondent was permitted to ward off the possession being taken over by the receiver upon payment; but the respondent chose not to make any payment. The sale of the excavator is confirmed in favour of Ajay Bir Singh of Pathankot subject to the entire consideration being paid by...
Deepak Kumar Prahladka Vs. Ananya Chatterjee Chakraborti and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
CS94of 2013 GA No.249 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL SIDE DEEPAK KUMAR PRAHLADKA VERSUS ANANYA CHATTERJEE CHAKRABORTI & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 11th February, 2014. Mr.Deepak Kumar Prahladka (in person) appeaRs.For the defendant Nos.1,2 & 5 : Mr.Shaunak Mitra,Advocate Ms.D.Adhikari,Advocate For the defendant Nos.3 & 4 : Mr.Rajarshi Basu,Advocate Mr.Paritosh Sinha,Advocate appeaRs.Ms.Sutapa Sanyal,Advocate appeaRs.The Court : -The defendant Nos.1 and 2, upon payment of cost of 100 GMs to the plaintiff shall be entitled to file written statement within a period of two weeks from date. In the event the said cost is not paid and the written statement is not filed within the aforesaid time, the suit shall be treated as an undefended suit against the said defendants. In so far as the application being GA No.249 of 2014 filed by the defendant No.6 is concerned, the time to file the written statement by the defendant No.6 is extended till date. The lea...
Nawn Estates Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Maheswary Ispat Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE Present : The Honble Justice Soumen Sen G.A.No.2918 of 2013 With C.S.132 of 2013 Nawn Estates PVT.LTD.versus Maheswary Ispat LTD.For the petitioner : Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury, Mr.Samrat Sen For the defendant : Mr.Ajay Krishna Chatterjee Heard on : 10.01.2014, 24.01.2014, 31.01.2014 Judgment on : 11th February, 2014 Soumen Sen, J.:- This application is at the instance of the defendant for setting aside of ex parte decree dated 5th September, 2013. The ground for setting aside of the decree appears to be that although the defendant after receiving summon had appointed an Advocate to conduct the proceedings but there had been some delay in preparation and affirmation of the affidavit of competency and filing the same with the Registry. The Junior to the Advocate-on-record, it is alleged, has failed to take steps in the matter resulting in the said ex parte decree. It is stated that on 2nd September, 2013, the Advo...
Magma Fincorp Limited Vs. Brahmaputra Infrastructure Ltd. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
AP AP AP AP AP AP AP No.710 No.711 No.712 No.713 No.714 No.715 No.717 of of of of of of of 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE MAGMA FINCORP LIMITED Versus BRAHMAPUTRA INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.& ANR. Appearance Mr.P.Sinha, Adv.Mr.K.R.Thakkar, Adv.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 11th February, 2014. The Court : In these matters a settlement was arrived at between the parties in couRs.of proceedings for dishonour of cheques made over by the respondents to the petitioning finance company. The settlement provided for the payment of the amounts due under these several agreements in instalments. Under the revised schedule, the respondents are in default of making payment of a sum of Rs.55 lakh that ought to have been made by January, 2014. A further amount becomes due on February 28, 2014. The petitioner insists that upon the breach of the settlement terMs.the petitioner is entitled to proceed agains...
- ‹ Prev
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- Next ›
- Last »