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.
Magma Fincorp Limited Vs. Ayub Idu Khan and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
AP No.383 of 2013 AP No.384 of 2013 AP No.743 of 2013 AP No.744 of 2013 AP No.751 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction MAGMA FINCORP LIMITED Versus AYUB IDU KHAN & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 12th March, 2014. Appearance: Ms.Sutapa Sanyal, Adv.Mr.K.K. Pandey, Adv.The Court : These five petitions under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, cover three agreements and were filed between April and July, 2013. Awards have been passed in the references in January and February, 2014. The petitioning finance company says that the assets covered by the agreements cannot be located, though some payments have been recovered pursuant to directions on receivers appointed by this Court to obtain monies due from the debtors of the fiRs.respondent to such respondent. The petitioner says 2 that further time should be afforded for the agents appointed by the receivers to trace out the assets covered by the agreements. S...
………… Petitioner Vs. Shri Krishnakant Balkishan Laddha and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
G.A.993 of 2012 C.S.282 of 2011 With G.A.994 of 2012 C.S.281 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Civil Jurisdiction Original Side In the matter of: Scope Commodeal Private Limited Petitioner versus Shri Krishnakant Balkishan Laddha & Anr. Respondents For Petitioner : Mr.Debnath Ghosh with Mr.Suvashish Sengupta, Mr.Avijit Dey, Advocates For Respondent : Mr.S.K.Bhattacharyya, Advocate with Mr.Suman Basu, Advocate Mr.Abdul Masood, Advocate Heard on : Judgment on : 27.02.2014 12th March , 2014 I.P.MUKERJI, J. GA993of 2012 connected with CS282of 2011 The cause of action of the plaintiff in this suit is recovery of moneys lent and advanced by them to the defendants. Between 2nd July, 2007 and 3rd April, 2008 a total sum of Rs.70 lakhs was lent and advanced. The money was credited into the joint accounts of the defendants. Admittedly, there was no agreement between the parties for payment of interest. The defendant sought to make part payment of the said loan by a cheque dated 30...
Smt. Suprova Basu and ors. Vs. Col.Mohit Maholanobis (Retd.)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
ORDER SHEET GA No.2693 of 2013 CS No.155 of 1995 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SMT. SUPROVA BASU & ORS.Versus COL.MOHIT MAHOLANOBIS (RETD.) BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 12th March, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Surojit Nath Mitra Sr.Adv.Mr.Dhruba Ghosh, Adv.Mr.Rupak Ghosh, Adv.Mr.Moloy Kumar Ghosh, Adv.The Court: There is a building at the crossing of Jawaharlal Nehru Road and Shakespeare Sarani. It is called Everest building. Col. Mohit Moholanobis, a retired officer of the armed forces was appointed an administrator of the affairs of this building. The charge against him in this suit was that he trespassed into the flat of the plaintiff and utilized it for his own purposes. Damages were claimed from him, in the form of mesne profits. On 15th June, 2009 the suit was decreed. He was held to be a trespasser from 1st January, 1985. His eviction was decreed. Sometime in 2011, he vacated the premises. The judgment and decree also p...
United Bank of India Vs. Thoudam Tombi Singh and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
APOT No.108 of 2014 GA No.699 of 2014 GA No.701 of 2014 WP No.1074 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE UNITED BANK OF INDIA Versus THOUDAM TOMBI SINGH & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE Mr.ARUN MISHRA The Hon'ble JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI Date : 12th March, 2014. For Appellant : For Respondents: Mr.Sukanta Das, Ms.Lopa Mudra Moitra, Advocates The Court : Delay in preferring the appeal as per averments made in the application is condoned. In view of the above, the application being GA No.699 of 2014 stands disposed of. List the matter after a week. (JOYMALYA BAGCHI, J.) SN/S.Kumar (ARUN MISHRA, CJ.) ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ/Civil Appellate/Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE BEFORE: The Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE Mr.ARUN MISHRA The Hon'ble JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI Date : 12th March, 2014. For Plaintiff/Petitioner : For Defendant/Respondent : The Court : All parties concerned are to act on a si...
M/S. Dhariwal Steel P. Ltd. Vs. M/S.Bengal Rolling Shutters and Eng. W ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-12-2014
CA208of 2013 CP219of 2003 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.DHARIWAL STEEL P. LTD.Versus M/S.BENGAL ROLLING SHUTTERS & ENG. WORKS BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 12th March, 2014. For the petitioning creditor : Mr.Reetobroto Mitra,Advocate Mr.Rupak Ghosh,Advocate Mr.Pradip Sarawagi,Advocate For the company : Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury,Advocate Mr.Deepnath Roy Chowdhury,Advocate Mr.A.Garodia,Advocate The Court : - By this application the applicant seeks leave to publish advertisement within the time sought and also for fixing the returnable date of the winding up petition within four weeks from such advertisement. In support of the said relief, Counsel for the applicant submits that the company petition was admitted for the sum of Rs.60,97,535.50 p. along with interest at 9 per cent per annum. The petitioning creditor was given liberty to publish advertisements and the returnable date was fixed six weeks after such publication. In appeal from the...
State Bank of Patiala Vs. the Official Liquidator
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-11-2014
ORDER SHEET CA No.168 of 2014 With CP No.587 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction IN THE MATTER OF: REXOR INDIA LTD.(IN LIQN.) AND STATE BANK OF PATIALA versus THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 11th March, 2014. Mr.U.S. Menon, Mr.R.K. Jain for the petitioning creditor. Mr.Amitava Das, Mr.V.Raja Rao for State Bank of Patiala. Mr.Ronojit Chowdhury for Official Liquidator. The Court : Directions are given for filing affidavits. Affidavit-in-opposition be filed within one week from date; reply, if any, be filed within a week thereafter. Matter to appear in the list three weeks hence. As the winding up order was passed on 10th January, 2014 and it is only on 13th January, 2014 that the applicant herein under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act has taken possession, in the fitness of things it is only the Official Liquidator who should be in physical possession of the assets of the company (in liquidation).Accordingly, let steps be taken...
Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 52(2), Kolkata and ors.R
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-11-2014
Order Sheet W.P.No.178 of 2014 In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side Bibek Kumar Bandopadhyay Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward -52(2).Kolkata & ORS.Petitioner Respondents BEFORE: The Hon'ble Justice Harish Tandon Date : 11th March, 2014. For Petitioner : Mr.Debanuj Basu Thakur, Adv.For Respondents : Mr.R.N.Bandyopadhyay with Mr.Aniket Mitra, Adversus For the financial year 200910 the authority while making an assessment, made the petitioner liable to pay a sum of Rs.9,98,333/-. The petitioner assailed the said order before the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals].which is still pending. According to the petitioner, the authorities could not have raised a demand when the appeal is pending before the Appellate authority. Admittedly, the petitioner did not take out an application for stay of the demand in the pending appeal. There is no fetter on the part of the department to take recouRs.for recovery of the demand in absence of any order of stay pass...
Nopany and Sons Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Sandip Sethi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-11-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION GA No.601 of 2014 GA No.32 of 2014 CS No.459 of 2013 Nopany & Sons PVT.LTD.Versus Sandip Sethi & ORS.GA No.534 of 2014 CS No.64 of 2014 Sandip Sethi & ORS.Versus Nopany & Sons PVT.LTD.& ORS.Before: The Hon'ble Justice I.P.MUKERJ.Date: 11th March 2014 Appearance: Mr.Ahin Choudhury, Sr.Advocate Mr.Ranjan Deb, Sr.Advocate Mr.Reetabrata Mitra, Advocate Mr.Aditya Kanodia, Advocate for the plaintiff in CS No.459 of 2013 Mr.Promit Kr. Roy, Advocate Mr.Shaunak Ghosh, Advocate Mr.S.K. Ray, Advocate for the plaintiff in CS No.64 of 2014 Mr.Utpal Bose, Advocate Mr.Rishad Medora, Advocate Mr.Meghajati Mukherjee, Advocate for the defendant in CS No.64 of 2014 The Court: I pass cross order for service of all cause papeRs.including copy of the plaints, in these applications. In GA No.32 of 2014 connected with CS No.459 of 2013, on 23rd December 2013 I had appointed Joint Special Officers to visit the site in question and make an inven...
Abdul Mokim Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-11-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.184 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ABDUL MOKIM Versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 11th March, 2014 Sk. Oli Mahhamad, Advocate ..for the petitioner Mr.Sadhan Roy Chowdhury, Advocate Mr.Sabhyasachi Roy Chowdhury, Advocate ..for the respondents The petitioner was a panel advocate of the State of West Bengal since 1998 till May, 2011. He is aggrieved because the bills raised by him for professional services rendered have not been cleared. I have heard learned advocates for the parties. It is not in dispute that the petitioner had been an empanelled advocate for nearly 14 yeaRs.In my considered view, the office of the Legal Remembrancer owes a duty to look into the bills that have been raised by the petitioner and to say, for good reasons, to what extent he is not entitled to the fees charged by him and to release such quantum of payment to the petitioner, as are found...
Tapati Ghosh Vs. Sm. Parul Barick
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-11-2014
ORDER SHEET CS1337OF1965IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE TAPATI GHOSH Versus SM. PARUL BARICK BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 11th March, 2014. Mr.S.G.Mookherjee, Adv.Ms.Susmita Pal, Adv..for the defendant Nos.1(a) and 1(g) Mr.Utpal Bose, Adv..for the defendant no.2. Mr.Chanchal Dutta, Adv..for the defendant nos.10,11. The Court: The suit appeared in the warning list for sometime. The suit was placed in the peremptory list on March 4, 2014 when nobody appeared. The suit was dismissed. On March 5, 2014 prayer was made for restoration which was granted. Prayer was made at the behest of the defendant without informing the Court that the learned Advocate appeared for the defendant. However, the suit was restored. Since then the Court was informed that the plaintiff was not alive and an administrator was appointed for the estate of the plaintiff. The administrator appointed also has expired. So no steps were taken by the part...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- Next ›
- Last »