Kolkata Court March 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.
Maharaja Kumar Saday Chand Mahatab of Burdwan Vs. Sushila Devi Jajodia ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Original Side Present: The Honble Justice Debasish Kar Gupta And The Honble Justice Ishan Chandra Das APD No.455 of 2003 G.A.No.292 of 2004 C.S.No.994 of 1959 Maharaja Kumar Saday Chand Mahatab of Burdwan Versus Sushila Devi Jajodia & ORS.For the appellant : Mr.A.C.Kar, Mr.Arindam Kar. For the respondent Nos.1 to 4. : Mr.S.B.Mookherjee, Sr.Advocate. Mr.S.Ganguly, Mr.S.N.Mookherjee, Sr.Advocate. For the respondent Nos.5(a) to 5(d).: Mr.R.L.Mitra, Mr.S.K.Mal, Ms.Priyanka Dhar. Judgment On : 14 -03-2014. Debasish Kar Gupta, J. : This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated May 23, 2003 passed in Suit No.994 of 1959. By virtue of the impugned judgment, the learned Trial Judge directed the Maharaja of Burdwan and his legal heirs and representatives to execute deed of conveyance in accordance with the decree dated May 5, 1959 passed in Suit No.2972 of 1953 (in re: Murlidhar Saraf versus Maharaja Adhiraj Bahadur) in r...
Modula India Vs. Kamakhya Singhdeo
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Original Side Present: The Honble Justice Debasish Kar Gupta And The Honble Justice Ishan Chandra Das APD No.398 of 2012 Arising out of C.S.No.568 of 1979 Modula India Versus Kamakhya Singhdeo For the appellant : Mr.Raj Kumar Gupta For the respondent : Mr.Maloy Ghosh Mr.Raja Basu Chowdhury, Mr.S.Mukherjee. Judgment On : 14-03-2014. Debasish Kar Gupta, J.: This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated August 24, 2012 passed in C.S.No.568 of 1979. The above suit was decreed on contests with costs against the defendant/appellant. The plaintiff/respondent got a decree for recovery of possession against the appellant by evicting him from the suit premises with a direction upon the appellant to deliver khas possession of the suit premises. The respondent also got a decree for recovery of Rs.40,950/- against the appellant as damages. The decree of mesne profits was passed in favour of the respondent from the date of in...
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
1 CA766of 2012 CP577of 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF : M/S.A.O.P.INDIA PVT.LTD.BEFORE : THE HONBLE JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN DATE : 14TH MARCH,2014. On behalf of Manicktala Property : Mr.Kaushik Chatterjee,Advocate Mr.Rajib Mullick,Advocate For Bank of India : Mr.M.R.SarbaSr.Roy,Advocate Mr.A.Das,Advocate Mr.D.K.Singh,Deputy Official Liquidator The Court :- This matter was adjourned from time to time to enable the Official Liquidator as well as Bank of India to take steps to have the property sold either by public auction or by private treaty. In view of the fact that recovery proceeding is pending before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, this Court adjourned the matter on 10th January,2014 initially and thereafter on 28th February,2014 in order to enable the bank to take appropriate steps for sale of the aforesaid property. Mr.M.R.SarbaSr.Roy,learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the bank submits that on 3rd March,2014 an order was passed by the Presiding Offic...
Tarachand Bajla and ors Vs. State of West Bengal and ors
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
ORDER SHEET W.P.No.221 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE TARACHAND BAJLA & ORS Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL Date : 14th March, 2014. For Petitioner : MR.DEBABRATA SAHAROY,ADVOCATE MR.P.BHATTACHARYAY,ADVOCATE MR.ARINDAM DEB ROY,ADVOCATE For State : MR.S.SENGUPTA,ADVOCATE MR.S.PAL,ADVOCATE The Court : Let affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept on record. On the prayer made on behalf of the petitioneRs.let the respondent nos.7 and 8 be deleted from the array of respondents and the cause title be amended accordingly in couRs.of the day. Heard Mr.Saharoy, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr.Sengupta, learned advocate for the state. Mr.Sengupta prays for time to obtain instruction. Let the matter appear as Court Application on 18th March, 2014. Learned advocate for the petitioners submits that as it is evident from Annexure-P/4 to the writ petition that the petitioners have been...
Kishore K. Agarwal @ Kishore Kumar Agarwal Vs. Eap Industries Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
ORDER SHEET CS No.1 of 2007 GA No.250 of 2007 GA No.46 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE KISHORE K. AGARWAL @ KISHORE KUMAR AGARWAL Versus EAP INDUSTRIES LIMITED BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 14th March, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Raja Basu Chowdhury, Adv.Mr.Partha Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.S.Jana, Adv. For Plaintiff Mr.Kuldip Mullick, Adv. For Defendant The Court: On 10th December, 2013 at the time of commencement of the argument on behalf of the plaintiff, the defendant appeared and orally prayed for leave to file Vakalatnama with short cause title. The hearing of the suit was adjourned till 7th January, 2014. Leave was given on such oral prayer to file Vakalatnama. Thereafter a petition has been filed on behalf of the defendant praying for condonation of delay and for extension of time to file Written Statement on behalf of the defendant. The reason given for such delayed appearance on behalf of the defendant is narrated in pa...
Nikhil Nischal Bagree Vs. Bagree Estate Pvt. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
GA No.1409 of 2013 CS142of 2004 CS258of 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL SIDE NIKHIL NISCHAL BAGREE VERSUS BAGREE ESTATE PVT.LTD.& ORS.BEFORE : THE HONBLE JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN DATE : 14TH MARCH,2014. Mr.P.C.Sen,Sr.Advocate appeaRs.Mr.Mainak Bose,Advocate appeaRs.Mr.R.R.Sen,Advocate appeaRs.Mr.Amitava Das,Advocate appeaRs.The Court :- This application for addition of party is at the instance of Chand Ratan Bagree and Uttam Kumar Bagree, both sons of late Gobardhan Das Bagree. The application has been filed by the said two persons for transposing them in the category of plaintiffs in the suit instituted by Nikhil Nischal Bagree for proper administration of defendant No.1 and various other reliefs. The admitted position is that the father of the applicant, by reason of family settlement, ceased to have any interest in the defendant No.1. The present applicants are claiming as legal heirs of Gopal Das Bagree on an assumption that had there been no adoption in favour of the plainti...
(In Liqn.) Vs. Official Liquidator,high Court Calcutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
ORDER SHEET CA NO.508 OF2013CP NO.511 OF2010IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF : REHAB LIFTING COMPANY PVT., LTD.(IN LIQN.) versus OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR,HIGH COURT CALCUTTA AND SK.SHAIDUL HUSSIAN AND ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 14th March, 2014. MR.B.MOHANTY,OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR The Court : By order dated 6th August, 2012 the company [in liquidation].was wound up and the Official Liquidator was directed to take possession of the assets and properties of the company [in liquidation].An attempt was made by the Official Liquidator to take possession of the assets and properties and some of the assets could be taken possession of but the details with regard to the company [in liquidation].regarding sums due and payable to it so also sums due and payable by it and further assets of the company [in liquidation].could not be ascertained as no statement of affairs has been filed by the exdirectors of the company [in liquidation]...
Sanjib Das Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
1 ORDER SHEET GA No.3808 of 2013 WP No.1229 of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SANJIB DAS Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 14th March, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Partha Sarathi Bose,Sr.Advocate with Mr.Arun K. Maity and Ms.Kaberi Sengupta Ld. Advocates for the appellant Mr.Tapan Mukherjee, AGP with Ms.Debjani Roy Ld. Advocate for the State. Mr.Saugata Bhattacharjee, ld. Advocate For Medical Council of India. Mr.Subrata Goswami, ld. Advocate For the writ petitioner. Mr.Biswajit Konar, ld. Advocate for the Added petitioner. The Court :- The review applicant was a party to the proceeding. He appeared but the learned senior Counsel was absent. Be that as it may, the issue raised by Mr.Bose, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the review applicant could be effectively gone into at the time of hearing of the appeal. They did not raise any issue at the hearing. In any e...
Sahadeb Saha and ors Vs. State of West Bengal and ors
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
ORDER SHEET W.P.No.220 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SAHADEB SAHA & ORS Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL Date : 14th March, 2014. For Petitioner : MR.DEBABRATA SAHAROY,ADVOCATE MR.P.BHATTACHARYAY,ADVOCATE MR.ARINDAM DEB ROY,ADVOCATE For State : MR.S.SENGUPTA,ADVOCATE The Court : Let affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept on record. On the prayer made on behalf of the petitioneRs.let the respondent nos.7 and 8 be deleted from the array of the respondents and the cause title be amended accordingly in couRs.of the day. Heard Mr.Saharoy, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr.Sengupta, learned advocate for the state. Mr.Sengupta prays for time to obtain instruction. Let the matter appear as Court Application on 18th March, 2014. Learned advocate for the petitioners submits that as it is evident from Annexure-P/4 to the writ petition that the petitioners have been granted licences...
Md. Mosarraf HossaIn Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Prev.), W.B.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-14-2014
Dr. D.M. Misra, J. 1. This is an application for waiver of predeposit of penalty of Rs.1.50 lakhs imposed under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. At the outset, the ld.Consultant appearing for the Applicant, has submitted that the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has not decided the issue on merit but dismissed their appeal for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962 as they failed to deposit the directed amount. The ld.Consultant has further submitted that the Applicant Company is facing acute financial hardship, accordingly, predeposit of the said amount as directed by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), would result in undue hardship. However, he has made an offer to deposit 10% of the penalty amount pending disposal of appeal and has prayed that the appeal be remanded to the ld.Commissioner (Appeals).3. The ld. A.R. for the Department, has reiterated the findings of the ld.Commissioner (Appeals). He has submitted that since the ld. Commissioner...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »