Kolkata Court April 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.
Re: Laxmi Narayan Udyog Ltd. Vs. Sonasa Trading Co. (L.T.C.)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-2014
ORDER SHEET ACO652014 APOT1582014 CP4522013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE RE: LAXMI NARAYAN UDYOG LTD.Versus SONASA TRADING Co.(L.T.C.) BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 16th April, 2014. Mr.Ratnanko Banerji, Advocate Ms.Sutapa Sanyal, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.Ahin Chowdhury, Sr.Advocate Mr.Mainak Bose, Advocate Mr.Anurag Bagaria, Advocate for the respondent. The Court : The learned single Judge, upon hearing the rival contentions of the parties, declined to admit the winding-up petition and asked the parties to approach the civil court. However, His Lordship would doubt the defence of the company. Hence, His Lordship asked the company to secure the claim to show their bona fide. In case the claim is secured, the winding-up petition would stand dismissed, otherwise the same would stand admitted. The petitioning creditor accepted the said order and did not prefer any appeal. The co...
Ashoke Industries Ltd. and ors. Vs. Kajal Sengupta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-2014
ORDER SHEET GA950of 2014 With CS73of 1998 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ASHOKE INDUSTRIES LTD.& ORS.Versus KAJAL SENGUPTA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 16th April, 2014. Mr.S.N.Mitra, Sr.Adv.Mr.A.Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Deepak Kr. Jain, Adv..for the plaintiffs. Mr.Dhruba Ghosh, Adv.Mrs.Ahana Sikdar, Adv.Mr.N.Sengupta, Adv..for the defendant nos.1&3. The Court : This was an application for amendment taken out by the defendant nos.1 and 3. The basis for the amendment was that the defendant no.5, which was described as a partnership firm was taken over by a company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act.1956. It was contended on behalf of the plaintiffs that documents of the take over of the defendant no.5 by the company were disclosed in the Judge's Brief of Documents on behalf of defendant nos.1 and 3. Reliance was placed on the Memorandum of Association of EmbiCo.Engineering Private Limited which was sought to...
Magma Fincorp Limited Vs. Maa Jagadamba Roadlines and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-2014
AP No.158 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction MAGMA FINCORP LIMITED Versus MAA JAGADAMBA ROADLINES & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 16th April, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury, Adv.Mr.K.K. Pandey, Adv.Mr.A.K. Banerjee, Adv.Sk. Faridullah, Adv.The Court : It is agreed between the parties that a sum of Rs.5,23,618/- will be tendered and accepted on account of the balance defaulted instalments and the interest thereon. However, the respondents seek to pay off the amount of Rs.5,23,618 in instalments but the petitioner is not agreeable to accept the money in instalments without further interest being charged. The sum of Rs.5,23,618/- will carry interest from today at the rate of 15 per cent per annum and the interest will be calculated on reducing balance basis. The respondents are permitted to pay off the amount in four equal or nearly equal monthly instalments payable along with the monthly instalments due under the ag...
Arup Bhattacharya Vs. Chief Judge, City Sessions Court and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-2014
WP No.897 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ARUP BHATTACHARYA Versus CHIEF JUDGE, CITY SESSIONS COURT & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 16th April, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Tanoy Chakraborty, Adv.Mr.Chhandak Dutta, Adv.Mr.Billwadal Bhattacharya, Adv.The Court : The petitioner was a stenographer attached to a fast track court in the City Sessions Court, Calcutta prior to abolition of fast track courts with effect from April 1, 2013. The petitioner claims that since several of the fast track courts in the State were subsequently retained at the behest of the State Government as permanent fast track courts and some of the fast track courts have been redesignated as regular courts with the creation of new courts, there was no need to terminate the services of the petitioner with effect from April 1, 2013 only to re-engage the petitioner with effect from June 1, 2013 when the petitioner was attending the court everyday bu...
Srei Equipment Finance Ltd. Vs. Virgo Softech Ltd and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-2014
AP No.1539 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE LTD.-VersusVIRGO SOFTECH LTD & ANR. Appearance: Mr.Debasish Kundu, Adv...for the petitioner. Mr.Mohit Gupta, Adv...for the respondent. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : April 16, 2014. The Court : The respondents are represented and it is submitted that due to the election season, the respondents have not been able to make payment of the amount as directed by the order dated April 1, 2014 as the payments due to the respondents in respect of the UID Adhar scheme have not been released. The order dated April 1, 2014 took cognizance of a similar submission made on behalf of the respondents, but required the respondents to clear a sum of Rs.50 lakh against the dues on account of defaulted instalments, in excess of Rs.2.25 crore for the respondent to ward off a direction on the receiver to take possession of the assets. Such payment has not been made. I...
Amitava Mitter and ors. Vs. Sri Samir Kumar Das.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-2014
ORDER SHEET CS No.63 of 1984 WITH EOS No.43 of 1988 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE AMITAVA MITTER & ORS.Versus Sr.SAMIR KUMAR DAS. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 16th April, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Dhruba Ghosh, Adv.Mr.Anil Dhar, Adv.for the defendant. Mr.S.N.Mitra, Sr.Adv.Ms.Suprana Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Amit Chatterjee, Adv.for the plaintiffs. The Court: There will be a decree in terms of the Terms of Settlement. The parties filed a Terms of Settlement on March 31, 2014. The defendants made over the possession of the suit premises to the plaintiffs. The defendants also paid the balance sum of Rs.3 lacs to the plaintiffs. The parties have no claims against each other. The photocopies of the receipt of payment and the receipt of possession are kept on record. The defendants will be entitled to apply to the Rent Controller for withdrawal of all the payments made on account of the plaintiffs during the pendency of C.S.No.63 of...
Ashim Kumar Dhar and ors. Vs. Smt. Indrani Roy and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-2014
GA No.618 of 2014 CS No.413 of 1989 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Ashim Kumar Dhar & ORS.Versus Smt. Indrani Roy & ORS.Before: The Honble Justice I.P.MUKERJ.Date: 16th April 2014 Appearance: Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Advocate Mr.Tapan Coomaar Dey, Advocate Mr.Jishnu Choudhury, Advocate for the plaintiff-petitioner Mr.Tapas Banerjee, Advocate for defendant Nos.1(a) & 1(b) Mr.D.N. Chunder, Advocate for defendant Nos.7 & 9 Mr.Arunabha Sengupta, Advocate for defendant Nos.10 to 15 The Court: Learned Counsel for the defendant Nos.1(a) and 1(b) still insists that his client would be able to get a higher offer. It is submitted on behalf of the defendant Nos.10 to 15 that they have withdrawn their consent to the sale of the property to the applicants nominee purchaser. The percentage holding of the dissenting co-sharers is about 22% now. Considering the aforesaid facts I direct the Receiver to advertise the sale of this property, with a brief description regarding...
Biswajit Manna, West Bengal Vs. United Bank of India Gariahat Branch E ...
Court: West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-16-2014
Tarapada Gangopadhyay, Member, J. The present Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order no. 29 dt. 10.10.12 of the Ld. Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit-I, Kolkata, passed in CDF/Unit-I/Case No. 200/2009, dismissing the Complaint. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts, which are relevant and pertinent for adjudication of the case, are set out hereinafter. The Appellant/Complainant, accompanied by other 10 fellow travellers including two children, booked four rooms with UBI Gariahat Branch Employees Holiday Home and Welfare Society at their Rajgir Holiday Home, Keshabasram by name, for the period from 24.3.2008 to 26.12.2008 against charges of ` 3,000/-. After reaching the said Holiday Home on 24.12.2008 the Complainant found the condition of the Holiday Home deplorable, and met with lack of services like absence of light in the staircase, big openings on the door panels, leakage of water from upper floor in the bathroom accompanied by unhygienic condition etc. Despit...
Shyamal Mookherjee Vs. Subrata Mookherjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-11-2014
1 ORDER SHEET CS No.41 of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SHYAMAL MOOKHERJEE Versus SUBRATA MOOKHERJEE & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 11th April, 2014. Appearance: Mr.S.K.Dutta, Adv.Mr.Syamantak Banerjee, Adv.The Court: The report filed by the Registrar, Original side dated 9th February, 2014 shows that on 11th May, 2009 a final decree was passed by the Honble Justice Patherya and after it was delivered by the learned Master and Official Referee on 18th February, 2009. The same was scrutinized on 8th January, 2010. During scrutiny it appeared that the decree was not sent to the Collectorate of Calcutta with a report of the Commissioner of Partition for adjudication of stamp duty under Order 20 and Rule 18 and Section 54 of the Code of Civil Procedure and also Section 31 and 32 of the Indian Stamp Act. The decree is required to be sent for adjudication at the instance of the concerned Advocates representing the p...
Union of India and anr. Vs. Income Tax Settlement Commission
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-11-2014
ORDER SHEET W.P.No.1154 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Versus INCOME TAX SETTLEMENT COMMISSION ADDITIONAL BENCH & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date: 11th April, 2014. Appearance: Md.Nizamuddin, Adv. for the petitioner Mr.Samit Talukdar, Sr.Adv.Mr.Ananda Sen, Adv.Mr.A.K.Mukherjee, Adv. for the respondent no.2 The Court: This writ petition is filed at the instance of the Department challenging an order dated 30th August, 2012 passed by the Settlement Commission under Section 154 and Section 245D(6B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. An application was made by the private respondent before the Settlement Commission under Section 245C of the said Act pertaining to assessment years 2004-05 to 2011-12. It is not in dispute that the application was entertained by the Settlement Commission and ultimately by an order dated 14th March, 2012 the Settlement Commission passed the following ordeRs.44. Regarding ...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »