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.
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction CP468OF2009BENGAL WATERPROOF LTD.AND MALVIKA SYNTHETICS (P) LTD.CP299OF2010BENGAL WATERPROOF LTD.AND JET AGE FINANCE PVT.LTD.CP311of 2010 BENGAL WATERPROOF LTD.AND KLASSIC APARTMENT PVT.LTD.CP11OF2011M/S.BENGAL WATERPROOF LTD.AND M/S.VISHWA ENTERPRISE CP12of 2011 M/S.BENGAL WATERPROOF LTD.AND M/S.TIRUPATI ENTERPRISES CP14OF2011M/S.BENGAL WATERPROOF LTD.AND SAVITA BHARTIA CP158OF2011BENGAL WATERPROOF LTD.AND M/S.CROMPTON INDUSTRIAL & CHEMICAL Co.CP566OF2011BENGAL WATERPROOF LTD.AND INDRAJIT BALL CP252OF2012BENGAL WATERPROOF LTD.AND ANSUYA J. DOSHI CP238OF2013BENGAL WATERPROOF LTD.AND JAI BOTHRA (HUF) CP257OF2013BENGAL WATERPROOF LTD.AND ANITA BOTHRA CP258OF2013BENGAL WATERPROOF LTD.AND ANUJ BOTHRA CP331OF2013M/S.BENGAL WATERPROOF LTD.AND SMT. PAYAL SINGHANIA CA353OF2013WITH CP566OF2011BENGAL WATERPROOF LTD.AND MAHESH TEA CHEST CP391OF2013BENGAL WATERPROOF LTD.AND HITESH BABARIA AND FAMILY, HUF CP404OF2013BENGAL WATERPROOF L...
New Alignment Vs. West Bengal Industrial
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
AP No.81 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE NEW ALIGNMENT -VersusWEST BENGAL INDUSTRIAL INFRASTURCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORP. & ORS.Appearance: Mr.B.B.Sarkar, Adv.Ms.Iti Dutta, Adv...for the petitioner. Mr.Debjyoti Basu, Adv...for the WBIDC. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : February 11, 2014. The Court : There is no defence to the contention of the petitioner that upon the appointing authority failing to act despite due receipt of the invocation of the arbitration agreement, the appointing authority has forfeited the right to appoint an arbitrator. Clause 25 of the general conditions governing the contract provides for arbitration, subject to the estimated cost of the work put to tender exceeding Rs.40 lakh. There is no dispute that the value of the work put to tender was well in excess of Rs.40 lakh. The petitioner claims the amount to be in excess of Rs.3.76 crore. The arbitration clause provides for the disputes betw...
Srei Equipment Finance Limited Vs. Dagcon India Private Limited and an ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
AP No.122 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE LIMITED -VersusDAGCo.INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. Appearance: Mr.Satarup Banerjee, Adv...for the petitioner. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : February 11, 2014. The Court : The respondents are not represented despite deemed service. The petitioner claims that a sum in excess of Rs.3.48 crore is due upon the termination of the agreement, including a sum in excess of Rs.1.18 crore on account of defaulted instalments. The petitioner relies on a letter dated December 20, 2013 apparently issued by the second respondent on behalf of the fiRs.respondent company indicating that the respondents desired to surrender the eight assets covered by the agreement. The petitioner says that all eight assets are now being used by Bharat Coking Coal LTD.There will be an order of injunction in terms of prayer (h) of the petition which will, however, not prevent the res...
Naini Plywood Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Markendeya Plywood Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
ORDER CS No.314 of 2002 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction NAINI PLYWOOD PVT. LTD. Versus MARKENDEYA PLYWOOD PVT. LTD. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date:11. h February 2014. Appearance: Mr. Dhruba Ghosh, Advocate Mr. Sarathi Dasgupta, Advocate ...for the plaintiff. Mr. Jishnu Chowdhury, Advocate Mr. Chayan Gupta, Advocate Mr. Rajesh Upadhyay, Advocate ...for the defendant. COURT: After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the suggested issues filed by them, the following issues are settled and set down for trial:1. Does the plaintiff enjoy copyright in the artistic representation of the letters NP adopted as its identified by the logo?.2. Are the goods of the plaintiff trademark/logo NAINI and NP in the market and by all its consumers and clients?.3. Is the plaintiff the prior user of the said trademark NAINI and log NP?.4. Are the said marks of the plaintiff and the defendant identical and/or deceptively similar?.5. Are ...
The Associated Cement Co. Ltd. Vs. Eastern Coalfields Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
ORDER SHEET CS No.369 of 2001 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE THE ASSOCIATED CEMENT Co.LTD.Versus EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 11th February, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Ajay Gaggar, Adv.Mr.Ashoke Basu, Adv.Mr.Partha Basu, Adv.Mr.Nikhil Kr. Roy, Adv.Mr.Aniruddha Mitra, Adv.The Court: In spite of the order dated 15th January, 2014 the defendant has failed to comply with the said order. Registrar, Original Side, is directed to enquire into the matter and ensure that the order dated 15th January, 2014 is complied with. The entire record relating to the suit shall be made available on or before the returnable date. Mr.Partha Basu, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the defendant, submits that due to demise of Mr.Udayan Sen the defendant has recently engaged Mr.Basu and he prays for time to file written statement. Such oral prayer for extension of time to file the written statement is not seriously opposed...
M.G.Paripoornam Vs. the Official Liquidator and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
C.A.No.347 of 2012 C.P.No.289 of 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction IN THE MATTER OF: CARRITT MORAN & CO.P.LTD.(IN LIQN.) AND IN THE MATTER OF : M.G.PARIPOORNAM VS THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 11th February, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Jayanta Mitra, Senior Advocate, Mr.Jaydip Kar, Advocate, Mr.T.Chakraborty, Advocate..for the applicant. Mr.S.N.Mookherjee, Senior Advocate with. Mr.Shaunak Mitra, Advocate..for the creditORS.Mr.Sabyasachi Choudhury, Advocate, Mr.Rishad Medora, Advocate with Mr.Sayantan Bose, Advocate..for respondent no.2. Ms.Ruma Sikdar, Advocate..for Official Liquidator. The Court :-This application has been filed by one Smt. M.G.Paripoornam, who alleges to be a bona fide purchaser from one Sailesh Mohan Sharma of 4.45 acres of agricultural land in survey No.4813/1C in Ooty since August, 2009. According to the applicant her property has been mentioned in the sale notice dated 23rd February, 2012 issued by the ...
Paresh Nath Pal Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side Present : The Honble Justice Dr. Sambuddha Chakrabarti February 11, 2014 WP1132of 2013 Paresh Nath Pal versus State of West Bengal & ORS.Mr.S.S.Arefin, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.Achintya Banerjee, Advocate with Mr.R.N.Chakraborty, Advocate for the respondent Nos.2 to 5 Ms.Debjani Roy, Advocate for the State The Court :- The petitioner is directed to add the University of Burdwan as a party respondent to the writ petition. Service is dispensed with as Mr.Banerjee, learned Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos.2 to 5 undertakes to appear for the University as well. Mr.Banerjee has raised a point that even if there had been any lapse on the part of the University in communicating the result of the review the son of the petitioner in any case would not have been admitted to the M.Sc (Hons) couRs.in the current academic session. Mr.Arefin has produced a copy of the answer scripts of Paper III of Mathematic...
Anil Agarwal Vs. the Official Liquidator
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
ORDER SHEET APO No.533 of 2004 C.P.No.510 of 1988 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ANIL AGARWAL Versus THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE TAPASH MOOKHERJEE Date : 11th February , 2014. Mr.Jishnu Saha,Advocate, Mr.S.Banerjee, Advocate Mr.R.Upadhayay, Advocate, Ms.Ananya Das, Advocate Mr.Soumabho Ghose, Advocate for the Appellant Mr.M.C.Ghosh, Advocate with Ms.Mithua Sen, Advocate for the Official Liquidator. Mr.P.K.Roy, Advocate with Md.Siddique, Advocate for Customs Authorities The Court : The appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 23rd February, 2004 by which the Company Application No.402 of 2003 made by the purchaser was dismissed. The Company Application No.402 of 2003 was made in or about August, 2003 praying for the following reliefs: a) An order be made directing the Official Liquidator to refund to the applicant the sum of Rs.17,98,440/- together with interest @ 24% ...
Biswajit Maji and anr Vs. Coal India Ltd. and ors
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
ORDER SHEET W.P.No.1190 of 2013 G.A.No.330 of 2014 G.A.No.331 of 2014 G.A.No.332 of 2014 G.A.No.333 of 2014 G.A.No.334 of 2014 G.A.No.335 of 2014 G.A.No.336 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE BISWAJIT MAJ.& ANR Versus COAL INDIA LTD.& ORS BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date : 11th February, 2014. Appearance : Mr.P.Ghosh, Adv. for the petitioners Mr.R.N. Majumder, Adv.Ms.Sanchita Barman Ray, Adv. for respondent Nos.2,3,4,5,6,7 & 8 Mr.A.Lahiri, Adv.Mr.S.Chatterjee, Adv. for the added respondents Md.Asrif Ali, Adv. for the C.B.I.The Court : The learned advocate in support of an application seeking addition of party submits that two other applications being G.A.No.422 of 2014 & G.A.No.423 of 2014 are not appearing in the list today. Let those applications also appear on 21.02.2014 (Friday) in the Supplementary List. Some of the added respondents say that the copy of these applications have not been served as well as the copy of t...
Sri Puskar Mal Dokania and ors. Vs. Coal India Limited and Others.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-11-2014
WP No.989 of 2011 In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side Sr.Puskar Mal Dokania & ORS.versus Coal India Limited & OtheRs.Before : The Honble Justice Dr. Sambuddha Chakrabarti Date : February 11, 2014. For Petitioners : Ms.Vineeta Meharia, Advocate Mr.Amit Nag, Advocate Mr.S.Mukherjee, Advocate For Respondents : Mr.Sapgangsu Basu, Sr.Advocate Mr.Aniruddha Mitra, Advocate Mr.Nikhil Nath Roy, Advocate The Court : Let the Affidavit-in-opposition filed on behalf of BCCL in Court today be kept on record. The subject matter of challenge in this writ petition is the report of the Committee dated September 6, 2010 formed by the Coal India Limited in pursuance of the order passed by this Court. The petitioners have inter alia prayed for a declaration that the report was bad, for a direction upon the respondents to form the mechanism for distribution of coal through letter of assurance/fuel supply agreement to new consumers and a direction upon the respondent ...
- ‹ Prev
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- Next ›
- Last »