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.
Pradip Kr. Singh Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Prev.), Patna
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-26-2014
Dr. D.M. Misra, J. 1. This is an Application for waiver of pre-deposit of penalty of Rs.50,000/-. 2. At the outset Shri Sukhendu Bhattacharjee, Ld.Advocate for the Applicant submits that they have already deposited the penalty amount of Rs.50,000/- against Challan No.1938/13 dated 10.04.2013 after filing the Appeal before this Tribunal. The Ld.Advocate further submits that the issue has not been decided on merit by the Ld.Commissioner(Appeals), but dismissed for default in making pre-deposit of the directed amount under Section 129E of Customs Act, 1962. 3. Ld.A.R. for the Revenue does not dispute about the said payment of Rs.50,000/-. 4. I find that the Appeal could be disposed of at this stage. Accordingly with the consent of both sidese I take up the Appeal itself for disposal. I find that the Appellant has deposited the entire amount of penalty and the issue has not been decided on merit by the Ld.Commissioner(Appeals). In the circumstances it is a fit case for remand to the Ld.Com...
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
1 ORDER SHEET CP No.467 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction IN THE MATTER OF: IMECO LTD.AND SWAPAN GHOSH BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 25th February, 2014. Mr.Aniruddha Mitra for petitioning creditor. Ms.Manju Bhuteria for the company. The Court : The company in the affidavit filed by it through Mr.Ramesh Kumar Sharma on 12th November, 2013 has admitted the claim of the petitioning creditor for a sum of Rs.1,90,797/- and has undertaken to make payment of the said sum as and when money is received from the Railways. In view of the admission made by the company C.P.467 of 2013 is admitted for the sum of Rs.1,90,797/- but the undertaking to pay money as and when received from the Railways cannot be accepted by this Court. In the writ proceedings filed from an order passed thereon an appeal has been filed by the Railways and though the appeal may be fixed 10 days hence, the payment of money cannot depend on either the disposal of the appeal or when mon...
Srei Equipment Finance Ltd. Vs. Genius Buildtech Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
AP No.61 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE LTD.-Versus- GENIUS BUILDTECH PVT.LTD.Appearance: Mr.Satarup Banerjee, Adv.Mr.N.Srinivas, Adv.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : February 25, 2014. The Court : The respondent is represented and is not in a position to dispute that a sum in excess of Rs.1 crore is due only on account of defaulted instalments. It is submitted on behalf of the respondent that because of the financial crisis in the respondent company, three of its major creditors have agreed to a corporate debt-restructuring plan in which the petitioner has declined to participate. The respondent says that it will not be in a position to make any payment in the next ninety days and can only begin to make payment in instalments thereafter. Since a sum in excess of Rs.1.70 crore would become due only on account of defaulted instalments at the end of a three-month period from today, it is ne...
Vs. M/S. Indus Towers Ltd.Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
ORDER SHEET A.P.O.No.16 of 2014 With A.P.No.1023 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE AYESHA KHATOON Versus M/S.INDUS TOWERS LTD.Appellant/Petitioner Respondent BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE -AndThe Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 25th February, 2014. For Appellant/Petitioner : Ms.Sucharita Biswas with Mr.Debpriya Gupta & Syed Jasimuddin Ahmed, Adversus For Respondent : Mr.Sukrit Mukherjee with Mr.Kanishka Bose, Adversus This appeal would arise out of an order dated November 28, 2013 passed ex parte as the appellant despite notice failed to appear. The facts would depict Vodafone Essar South Ltd., a mobile company, entered into an agreement with the appellant for setting up a tower at the appellants premises on payment of monthly license fee of Rs.3,500/- as agreed in 2007 with a provision for increase at three years interval at the rate of 10%. The lady permitted Vodafone to install the tower that substantially damaged her buil...
Ashupati Nath Dhandania Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
ORDER SHEET WP432014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ASHUPATI NATH DHANDANIA Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date : 25th February, 2014. Mr.A.Chakraborty, Adv.appeaRs.Mr.S.B.Saraf, Adv.appeaRs.Mr.R.Bhardwaj, Adv.appeaRs.The Court : The petitioner has assailed the inaction on the part of the authorities in not releasing the goods confiscated by the authorities from the custody of the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner was apprehended at Malda railway station while carrying eight numbers of gold biscuits weighing 933.12 gMs.and a seizure list was also handed over to the petitioner. was initiated after issuance of the show cause notice and A proceeding the assessing authority found the petitioner guilty of offence. The petitioner carried the said order before the appellate authority who affirmed the order of the assessing authority. The said order of the appellate authority was assailed by the petit...
Duckbill Drugs Pvt Ltd and ors. Vs. Bell Finvest India Ltd and anr
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
ORDER SHEET GA NO.304 OF2014WITH CS NO.28 OF2014IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE DUCKBILL DRUGS PVT LTD AND ORS.Versus BELL FINVEST INDIA LTD AND ANR BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 25th February, 2014. Mr.C.Gupta, Mr.N.A.Chakrabortyappear. Mr.S.Banerjee, Mr.V.Duttaappear. The Court : Here the borrowers are before the Court. They want the loan obtained by them from the defendants to be quantified. The flat belonging to the second and third plaintiffs are mortgaged in favour of the fiRs.defendant as security for the loan. According to Mr.Banerjee this security is inadequate. According to the plaintiffs, the principal sum owing is about Rs.92 lacs. Interest is separate. According to Mr.Banerjee, learned advocate for the defendants more than Rs.2 crores are owing by the plaintiffs to them. Mr.Banerjee had agreed to the proposal made by the Court for sale of the property for liquidation of this loan. That order was recorded on ...
Jupiter International Ltd. and anr. Vs. the National Insurance Co. Ltd ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side Present : The Honble Justice Dr. Sambuddha Chakrabarti February 25, 2014 WP357of 2012 Jupiter International LTD.& Anr. versus The National Insurance Co.LTD.& ORS.Mr.Samit Talukdar, Senior Advocate with Mr.U.S.Menon, Advocate Mr.Santanu Chatterjee, Advocate for the petitioners Mr.Samim Ahamed, Advocate for the respondents The Court :- Let affidavit in opposition as well as the affidavit in reply filed in Court today be kept with the record. Heard Mr.Talukdar, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Ahamed, learned Advocate for the respondent Corporation prays for accommodation on the ground of the learned Senior Advocate, Mr.Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya. It may be mentioned that on February 18, 2014 when the matter was taken up the hearing of the matter was adjourned on the ground of Mr.Bhattacharya. In spite of assurance given by Mr.Ahamed that Mr.Bhattacharya would be present in Court today he had again ...
Smt. Jagdamba Tekriwal Vs. Paragon Highrise Makers Pvt. Ltd.and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
ORDER SHEET CS No.169 of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SMT. JAGDAMBA TEKRIWAL Versus PARAGON HIGHRISE MAKERS PVT.LTD.& ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 25th February, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Satarup Banerjee, Adv.Mr.Dhruba Ghosh, Adv.Mr.S.Ghosh, Adv.Mr.Soumen Das, Adv.The Court: Mr.Soumen Das learned Advocate representing the defendant submits that the defendant is willing to settle the suit as Rs.13.50 lakhs. Mr.Satarup Banerjee, learned Counsel representing the plaintiff has agreed on behalf of his client to settle the suit in the event, the plaintiff pays Rs.13.50 lakhs within a fortnight from date. Mr.Achintya Kumar Ghosh on behalf of the defendant deposed before this Court that the defendants are ready and willing to settle the suit and offer to make payment of Rs.13.50 lakhs as full and final settlement of the claim of the plaintiff in the suit. The witness has also stated that the said defendants would pay a ...
The Board of Trustees for the Port of Calcutta Vs. Panchu Gopal Bose
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Original Side Before: The Honble Justice Debangsu Basak C.S.No.708 of 1988 The Board of Trustees for the Port of Calcutta versus Panchu Gopal Bose For the Plaintiff : Mr.Suhid Ray Chowdhury, Advocate Mr.Dipak Ranjan Mukherjee, Advocate Heard on : January 20, 2014 & February 21, 2014 Judgment on : February 25, 2014 DEBANGSU BASAK, J. The suit was for recovery of damages. The plaintiff invited tender for construction of a Diesel Loco Shed at Haldia. The defendant participated in such tender. The plaintiff accepted the tender of the defendant and placed a work order. The total value of the work order was Rs.6,83,998.39p. The work was to be carried out in accordance with the plaintiffs General Conditions of Contract. According to the plaintiff the defendant delayed commencement of the work. In spite of repeated requests and demands, the defendant failed and neglected to resume work. In fact, the defendant abandoned the work...
Union of India Vs. M/S. Arbind Enterprises
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-25-2014
AP No.972 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE UNION OF INDIA -VersusM/S.ARBIND ENTERPRISES Appearance: Mr.L.K.Chatterjee, Sr.Adv.Ms.Aparna Banerjee, Adv...for the petitioner. Mr.B.S.Sinha Roy, Adv.Mr.D.Chakraborty, Adv...for the respondent. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : February 25, 2014. The Court : It is quite possible that railway officials have contrived to bring about the present situation. It is not altogether unknown for government officials to side with a private party by putting up a show of opposition. This petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was filed on August 27, 2013 seeking to challenge an award of April 22, 2013. The award was admittedly received by the General Manager, Eastern Railway on April 24, 2013. The Union seeks to rely on the Supreme Court judgment reported at 2005 (4) SCC239 which is both binding and has to be considered as the law of the land under Ar...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »