Kolkata Court June 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.
M/S. Sitaram Agarwala (Contractor) Vs. Union of India and ors.(S.E.Rly ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-03-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction AC No.4 of 2013 M/S.SITARAM AGARWALA (CONTRACTOR) Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.(S.E.RLY.) AND AP No.185 of 2005 UNION OF INDIA & ORS.Versus SITARAM AGARWAL BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 3rd June, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Amitava Ghosh, Adv.Mr.Moloy Kr. Das, Adv.The Court : In view of the now settled position of law as recognised in the judgment reported at AIR2011Supreme Court 2620 (Union of India v. M/S.Krafters Engineering and Leasing (P) Ltd.) that the arbitrator cannot grant interest in a reference under the Arbitration Act, 1940 by ignoring the terms of the contract between the parties, the challenge to the award of interest for the pre-reference period and during the pendency of the reference has, per force, to be upheld. The award-holder shows nothing to detract from the legal position that pre-reference and pendente lite interest may not be awarded by an arbitral tribunal under the 1940 Act in th...
Magma Fincorp Limited Vs. M/S. Skywings Car Rental and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-03-2014
AP No.575 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE MAGMA FINCORP LIMITED Versus M/S.SKYWINGS CAR RENTAL & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 3rd June, 2014. Appearance: Ms.S.Sanyal, Adv.The Court : The respondents are not represented despite previous service and despite being made aware of the order dated April 24, 2014. The order dated April 24, 2014 recorded the petitioners submission that a sum in excess of Rs.1.38 crore was due upon the termination of the agreement, including an amount in excess of Rs.14 lakh on account of defaulted instalments. In view of a deed of assignment executed by the fiRs.respondent in favour of the petitioner by which the fiRs.respondent assigned all its receivables from its debtors to the petitioner in the event of there being any default in payment under the hire purchase agreement, the respondents were restrained from receiving any payment from the entities described at paragraph 45 o...
L and T Finance Ltd Vs. Siburam Prasad Mallick and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-03-2014
AP No.395 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction L & T FINANCE LTD Versus SIBURAM PRASAD MALLICK AND ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 3rd June, 2014. Ms.S.Saha, Adv.appears The Court : The respondents are not represented despite previous service. The Receiver has made an inventory of the asset covered by the agreement and has filed a report. The petitioner says that though the previous order of April 21, 2014 required the respondents to pay a sum of Rs.4 lakh against the outstanding instalments, only a sum of Rs.3 lakh has been tendered. The petitioner claims that the amount due now on account of defaulted instalments is in excess of Rs.5 lakh. Let the matter appear six weeks hence. In the event a sum of Rs.4 lakh is not paid by the respondents to the petitioner by way of a bankers cheque or demand draft or like instrument, not being a personal cheque, within a period of three weeks from date, the Receiver will take possession ...
Eden Realty Ventures Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Eden Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-03-2014
ORDER SHEET CS No.80 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE EDEN REALTY VENTURES PVT.LTD.Versus EDEN INFRAPROJECTS PVT.LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 3rd June, 2014. Appearance: Mr.S.N. Mitra, Sr.Adv.Mr.Sourya Sadhan Bose, Adv.The Court : This suit has appeared as an Undefended Suit in view of the failure on the part of the defendant to enter appearance in spite of service of the Writ of Summons. However, when this suit was called, Mr.S.S.Bose, learned counsel, appears and submits that the defendant has engaged M/S.Khaitan & Co.to contest this proceeding and some time may be given to the defendant to enter appearance and file the written statement. Mr.S.N.Mitra, learned senior counsel, submits that under Chapter 8 Rule 17 of the High Court, Original Side Rules the Department can only accept appearance without leave at any time before the suit is set down in the warning list of Undefended Suits. However, an appearance ...
Van Udyog Exim Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Bangladesh Krishi Bank and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-03-2014
ORDER SHEET GA No.782 of 2014 CS No.204 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE VAN UDYOG EXIM PVT.LTD.Versus BANGLADESH KRISHI BANK & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 3rd June, 2014. Appearance: Ms.Sutapa Sanyal, Adv.Mr.Biswanath Chatterjee, Adv.Mr.S.Sarkar, Adv.Mr.J.Abedin, Adv.Mr.A.Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.V.Raja Rao, Adv.Ms.A.Rao, Adv.The Court :exporter of food staff these goods consignment is in The plaintiff claims to be an to Bangladesh. They claim to have exported November 2012 to a Bangladeshi buyer. One involved. Three letters of credit were opened by the Bangladesh buyer in favour of Bangladesh Krishi Bank, the fiRs.defendant. They were of the value of US$ 3,90,000 each. They were opened on 25th September, 2012, 2nd October, 2012 and 3rd October, 2012. The second defendant, State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur is described as the negotiating or correspondent bank. According to Ms.Sanyal, learned Advocate for the plaintiff...
. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Kol – Iii, Commissionerate
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-03-2014
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction [Central Excise].ORIGINAL SIDE CEXA No.14 of 2013 M/S.ASHOK ELECTRICAL STAMPINGS PVT.LTD . Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, KOL III, COMMISSIONERATE BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASIM KUMAR MONDAL Date : 3rd June, 2014. For Appellant : Mr.Arijit Chakrabarti, Advocate The Court : The subject matter of challenge in this appeal is a judgment and order dated 15th November, 2012 passed by the learned CustoMs.Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. The impugned order reads as follows: Heard both sides.2. Vide this Tribunals Stay Order No.S-935/Kol/2012 dated 06.08.2012, the Applicant were directed to make predeposit of 25% of the duty and report compliance on 15.10.2012. The Order was pronounced after conclusion of the hearing and in the presence of their Advocate. On 15.10.2012, the Applicant did not make the predeposit. The case was accordingly posted to 15.11.2012. Today also, ...
Nampa Electricals Pvt Ltd Vs. New Hariyana Transport Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-03-2014
ORDER SHEET ACO No.87 of 2014 APOT No.243 of 2014 CA No.227 of 2014 CP No.349 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE NAMPA ELECTRICALS PVT LTD Versus NEW HARIYANA TRANSPORT Co.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 3rd June, 2014. Appearance : Mr.Sakya Sen, Advocate. Mr.Aniruddha Mitra, Advocate. Mr.Rohit Mukherjee, Advocate. for the appellant. Mr.Niloy Sen Gupta, Advocate. for the respondent. The Court : This appeal is against the order dated 4th April, 2014 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby an application filed by the appellant seeking recall of the order dated 17th February, 2014 admitting the winding up application filed by the respondent has been admitted and advertisements have been directed to be issued. It appears that pursuant to the directions of the learned Single Judge, affidavit-in-opposition to the winding up petition was filed. However, certain documents had not been anne...
Debendra Nath Ghosh and Others Vs. the State of West Bengal and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-02-2014
WP No.514 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction DEBENDRA NATH GHOSH AND OTHERS Versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 2nd June, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Susanta Pal, Adv.Mr.Pantu Deb Roy, Adv.The Court : The claim of the petitioners is on account of interest for delayed payment of the dues under the latest revision of pay and accounts that the petitioners were entitled to. The parties say that in similar circumstances an order was made by this Court on June 21, 2013 in WP No.517 of 2013 (Dilip Sankar Das versus The State of West Bengal).Since there are several petitioners and the exact extent of entitlement of each individual petitioner is not indicated in the petition, the petitioners are permitted to submit a representation indicating their exact amounts of entitlement within a fortnight from date to the managing director of the respondent company. The managing director will make an assessment in acco...
Smt. Madhu Agarwala Vs. Sri Goutam Kumar Roy
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-02-2014
ORDER SHEET A.P.No.949 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SMT. MADHU AGARWALA Versus Sr.GOUTAM KUMAR ROY BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 2nd June, 2014. Appearance : Mr.Siddartha Banerjee, Adv.Mr.Chandan Kr. Lal, Adv.The Court : Since no affidavit-in-opposition has been filed despite directions being issued on September 11, 2013, there is no objection to the case made out in the petition. The respondent is also not represented. The arbitration clause is contained in the development agreement of October 16, 2000. It is couched in the widest words and provides for an arbitrator to be appointed jointly by the parties or the two sets of parties appointing their individual nominees as arbitratORS.By a letter dated May 13, 2013, the petitioner indicated the petitioners nominee as arbitrator. Despite such invocation of the arbitration agreement and a subsequent reminder, the respondent did not reply to the letteRs.The petitioners...
Vedic Tracom Private Limited Vs. Dhananjoy Jasrapuria and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-02-2014
AP No.192 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE VEDIC TRACo.PRIVATE LIMITED Versus DHANANJOY JASRAPURIA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 2nd June, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Saurav Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Sandeep Joshi, Adv.Mr.Biswanath Chatterjee, Adv.The Court : The respondents have no defence on merits to the present request under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. However, as is fashionable for dexterous litigants without any substantial defence, the only attempt is to delay the matter by referring to points which are of no concern to the respondents. At the initial stage of the present proceedings, it was submitted on behalf of the respondents that the document containing the arbitration clause was an unregistered agreement pertaining to an immovable property and, as such, the Court could not take cognizance thereof without due stamp duty in respect thereof being tendered. The original agreement ...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »