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.
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-2014
ORDER SHEET CP No.648 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE AJANTA LEATHER FASHIONS PRIVATE LIMITED -ANDMr.VINAY CHOJAR AND ANOTHER BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 4th April, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Pran Gopal Das, Adv.Mr.C.Sinha,Adv.Mr.A.Sinha, Adv.for the company Mr.Lal Ratan Mondal, Adv.for the petitioners The Court : A statutory notice was issued by the petitioning creditor to the company on 27th May, 2013 wherein for price of goods sold and delivered, Sums were claimed. A reply has been given to such statutory notice by no less a person than the advocate of the company and in the said reply the advocate on behalf of the company has categorically stated that his client, the company, intends to settle the claim of the petitioning-creditor by making payments by instalments. A cheque of Rs.1 lac was also forwarded as part payment of its claim. In view of the said letter, C.P.No.648 of 2013 is admitted for the sum of Rs.5,80,994/- along with...
Dilip Kumar Dasgupta Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.231 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE DILIP KUMAR DASGUPTA Versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 4th April, 2014 Mr.Dilip Kumar Dasgupta, Appears in-person Despite service, none appears for the respondents. The petitioner was a panel advocate of the State of West Bengal since 1986 till May, 2011. He is aggrieved because the bills raised by him for professional services rendered have not been cleared. I have heard the petitioner, appearing in person. It is not contested before me that the petitioner had been an empanelled advocate for nearly 25 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 to be admissible. That would ...
Dr Sugata Mohan Bose Vs. Bhagirath Pasari and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE AP No.346 of 2010 DR SUGATA MOHAN BOSE -VERSUS- BHAGIRATH PASARI AND OTHERS -AND- AP No.347 of 2010 DR SUGATA MOHAN BOSE -VERSUS- SAJAN KUMAR PASARI AND OTHERS For the Petitioner: Mr Dhruba Ghosh, Adv., Mr Rangaboti Sen, Adv., Mr Shyantan Bose, Adv.For the Respondent No.1 in AP No.346 of 2010: Mr Abhrajit Mitra, Adv., Mr Jishnu Chowdhury, Adv., Mr Sarbopriyo Mukherjee, Adv.Mr Soumavo Ghosh, Adv.For the Respondent No.1, 2 & 3 in AP No.347 of 2010: Mr Abhrajit Mitra, Adv., Mr Jishnu Chowdhury, Adv., Mr Sarbopriyo Mukherjee, Adv.Mr Soumavo Ghosh, Adv.Hearing concluded on: April 2, 2014. BEFORE SANJIB BANERJEE, Judge Date: April 4, 2014. SANJIB BANERJEE, J. : The two petitions are by the same petitioner for challenging arbitral awards of December 30, 2005 in references arising out of similar agreements of January 18, 1983. The prayers for annulment of the arbitral awards are fashioned under Sections 30 and 33...
Eastern Trucking Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-2014
AP No.98 of 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE EASTERN TRUCKING Co.PVT.LTD.-VersusTHE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE Co.LTD.Appearance: Mr.Joy Saha, Adv.Mr.Vivek Jhunjhunwala, Adv...for the petitioner. Mr.N.K.Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Niladri Khanra, Adv.Mr.Atish Ghosh, Adv...for the respondent. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 4th April, 2014. The Court : There is an increasing murmur in the corridors of justice that one of the modern impediments to the justice delivery system is the judge-lawyer nexus where priorities in taking up matters for hearing are not decided on the gravity of the matters but on the perceived reputation of and familiarity with the lawyer representing the cause. But the present matter shows that the larger impediment to the justice delivery system may be the complicity of lawyers attempt to deceive Court. with clients in a shameless The challenge to the award in this case was carried to the Court on March 29, 20...
Smt. Gita Dey and ors. Vs. Smt. Nalinibala Dey and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Original Side Before: The Honble Justice Debangsu Basak G.A.No.2740 of 2012 C.S.No.911 of 1988 Smt. Gita Dey & ORS.versus Smt. Nalinibala Dey & ORS.For the Plaintiffs : Mr.Sabyasachi Chowdhury, Advocate Mr.Arif Ali, Advocate Mr.R.B.Prasad, Advocate For the Defendants : Mr.Sakhya Sen, Advocate Mr.P.Saha, Advocate Heard on : March 10 & 31, 2014 Judgment on : April 04, 2014 DEBANGSU BASAK, J. In this suit for partition a preliminary decree relating to five immoveable properties was passed on September 17, 2002. So far as the other immovable properties and the businesses of the family were concerned, the judgment and preliminary decree dated September 19, 2002 provided that, the learned Joint Commissioner of Partition appointed by such judgment and preliminary decree would make an enquiry as to whether there was any dispute as regard the share of the parties in relation thereto. If the learned Joint Commissioner of Partitio...
Dwarkapati Developers Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Dilip Sonkar and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-2014
ORDER SHEET GA No.680 of 2014 CS No.74 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE DWARKAPATI DEVELOPERS PVT.LTD.& ANR. Versus DILIP SONKAR & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 4th April, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Sarbapriya Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Chayan Gupta, Adv.for plaintiffs Mr.Rupak Ghosh, Adv.Mr.Jayanta Kr. Sengupta, Adv.Mr.Uttam Kr. Mondal, Adv.for respondent no.7 Mr.Arindam Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Hare Krishna Halder, Adv.for intervenORS.Mr.Sanatan Panja, Adv.Ms.Shakuntala Mukherjee, Adv.Joint ReceiveRs.The Court : This litigation concerns premises no.3, Raghunandan Lane, PS- Jora Bagan, Kolkata 700006. Appearing on behalf of the plaintiffs, Mr.Mukherjee submits that his clients have purchased the said premises from three co-owners and have made full payment of the consideration amount to them. The conveyance has also been executed by the erstwhile co-owners in favour of Mr.Mukherjees client. One of the erstwhile co-owners is b...
Vs. Ritesh Kumar Boyedrespo
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-2014
ORDER SHEET G.A.No.3284 of 2013 I.T.A.T.No.187 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction [Income Tax].ORIGINAL SIDE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-XIV, KOLKATA Versus RITESH KUMAR BOYED Appellant/Petitioner Respondent BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA -AndThe Hon'ble JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA Date : 4th April, 2014. For Appellant/Petitioner : MRS.Mamta Bhargava, Adv.For Respondent : Mr.R.Bharadwaj, Adv.The subject matter of challenge in this appeal is a judgement and order dated 16th May, 2013 by which the learned Tribunal allowed the appeal preferred by the assessee against an order dated 23rd March, 2012 passed by the C.I.T.in exercise of power under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act which reads as follows : In view of the above, the assessment order u/s.143(3) dated 21.12.2009 passed by the ITO, Ward-42(4).Kolkata is found to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue and accordingly the order u/s.143(3) dated 21.12.2009 is set aside w...
Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkataiii, Kolkata Vs. M/S. Eih Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-2014
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction [Income Tax].ORIGINAL SIDE G.A.No.443 of 2014 I.T.A.T.No.6 of 2014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-III, KOLKATA Versus M/S.EIH LTD.-AndG.A.No.250 of 2014 I.T.A.T.No.7 of 2014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-III, KOLKATA Versus M/S.EIH LTD.-AndG.A.No.248 of 2014 I.T.A.T.No.17 of 2014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-III, KOLKATA Versus M/S.EIH LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA -AndThe Hon'ble JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA Date : 4th April, 2014. For Appellant in I.T.A.T Nos.6 & 7 of 2014 : MRS.Mamta Bhargava, Adv.For Appellant in I.T.A.T No.17 of 2014 : Mr.P.K.Bhowmick, Adv.For Respondent : Mr.R.N.Bajoria, Sr.Adv.with Mr.Siddhartha Das, Mr.A.Gupta & Mr.Ashim Chowdhury, Adversus The subject matter of challenge in these three appeals is a judgement and order dated 31st July, 2013 by which the appeals preferred by the revenue against an order passed by the CIT (A) reversing orders under Section 147 of th...
Raj Ratan Packaging Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Esjay Commerce Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-2014
ORDER SHEET CP No.748 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction RAJ RATAN PACKAGING PVT.LTD.Versus ESJAY COMMERCE LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 4th April, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Kuldip Mallick, Adv.Mr.Niloy Sengupta, Adv.The Court : No reply has been given to the statutory notice dated 26th August, 2013. No affidavit-in-opposition has also been filed. Therefore, in other words, the company has admitted the claim of the petitioning creditor. In fact, the claim arises out of Inter Corporate loan advanced by the petitioning creditor to the company for the sum of Rs.25 lakhs. After filing of this winding up application a sum of Rs.5 lakhs had been paid on diveRs.dates. Therefore, the balance amount that needs to be paid is Rs.20 lakhs and accordingly CP No.748 of 2013 is admitted for the sum of Rs.20 lakhs along with interest payable at 8% per annum on and from the date of issuance of the statutory notice till realisation on the reducing balance. The said ...
M/S. Shilpa Creation Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.256 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.SHILPA CREATION PVT.LTD.& ORS.Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 4th April, 2014 Mr.Sandip Kumar Bhattacharya, Adv.with Mr.Suman Basu, Adv.Mr.Abdul Masood, Adv..for the petitioners Mr.Billwadal Bhattacharyya, Adv..for the State The Deputy Director, Enforcement Directorate had passed an order dated 30th April, 2001 on file T-4/47/Cal.2000/DD/ADJ/716 holding the petitioner firm and its partners guilty of contravention of provision of Section 18(2) read with Section 18(3) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (hereafter the Act).A consolidated penalty of Rs.6,00,000/- was imposed in terms of the provision of Section 50 of the Act, to be deposited in the office of the Deputy Director by cheque/demand draft within 15 days. The petitioners had carried the order dated 30th April, 2001 in appeal before the Appellate Tribunal for Forei...
- ‹ Prev
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- Next ›
- Last »