Kolkata Court July 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.
Steel Authority of India Limited Vs. M/S. T.D. Kumar and Bros. Pvt. Li ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Original Side Before: The Honble Justice Debangsu Basak C.S.No.936 of 1978 Steel Authority of India Limited versus M/S.T.D.Kumar & Bros. PVT.Limited For the Plaintiff : Mr.Pramit Roy, Sr.Advocate Mr.Arik Banerjee, Advocate Mr.Rajib Mukherjee, Advocate Heard on : July 09, 2014 Judgment on : July 16, 2014 DEBANGSU BASAK, J.:- The suit was for realization of the value of the goods which the defendant as the storage and handling contractor failed to account for. Hindustan Steel Limited acted as the agent of Bokaro Steel Limited. Hindustan Steel Limited appointed the defendant as the storage and handling contractor for handling export consignment with effect from July 1, 1976. The defendant executed an Indemnity and Custody Bond on November 19, 1976 in favour of the Hindustan Steel Limited. By a letter dated June 30, 1977 the arrangement between Hindustan Steel Limited and the defendant was extended up to June 30, 1978. In t...
Vs. Tarun Kumar Ghosh and ors.Defendants/Respon
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-2014
ORDER SHEET G.A.No.3291 of 2013 G.A.No.3029 of 2013 C.S.No.356 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ST. MARY'S NURSING HOME PVT.LTD.Versus TARUN KUMAR GHOSH & ORS.Plaintiff/Petitioner Defendants/Respondents BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 16th July, 2014. For Plaintiff/Petitioner : Mr.S.K.Kapoor & Mr.Jishnu Saha, Sr.Adversus with Mr.Arindam Banerjee, Mr.Ashis Kr. Mukherjee, Mr.Anubhab sinha & Mr.Sandip Agarwal, Adversus For Defendants/Respondents : Mr.S.N.Mitra & Mr.Ashish Chakraborty, Sr.Adversus The fiRs.to sixth defendants are the owners of 2/1, Ho Chi Minh Sarani, Kolkata, or at least the part of the said premises, which is the subject matter of this litigation. In September 1981 a suit [Suit No.771 of 1981].was filed by Durgabati Ghosh against the seventh defendant, which had been granted a 21 years lease of a portion of the said premises. This suit was decreed on 3rd September, 2013. There is no dispute that the pl...
Manoj Kumar Singh Vs. New Hariyana Transport Co.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-2014
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ACO1212014 APOT3412014 CP3492013 AND ACO1222014 APOT3422014 CP3492013 MANOJ KUMAR SINGH Versus NEW HARIYANA TRANSPORT Co.BEFORE: The Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE BANERJEE, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 16th July, 2014. Mr.Sakya Sen, Advocate Mr.Aniruddha Mitra, Advocate Mr.Rohit Mukherjee, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.Nilay Sengupta, Advocate Mr.Shailendra Jain, Advocate for the respondent. The Court : These two appeals would relate to a winding-up proceeding. Hence, these two appeals be heard analogously. The sole respondent is represented. Hence, service of notice of appeal upon the sole respondent is dispensed with. The appellant is directed to file requisite number of composite informal paper books incorporating all the papers and documents used before the learned single Judge within three weeks from date. As soon as paper book is filed, place it for hearing. In default, p...
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-2014
ORDER SHEET CP NO.484 OF2013IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF : M/S.ESS DEE ALUMINIUM LTD AND MALAY KAMDAR BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 16th July, 2014. MR.M.S.TIWARI, MR.A.K.SHUKLA, MR.R.K.PANDEY, MR.V.K.TIWARI, ADVOCATES FOR PETITIONING CREDITOR MR.RATNANKO BANERJEE,SR.ADVOCATE, MR.D.CHOWDHURY, MR.S.MITRA, MR.S.CHOWDHURY, MR.S.BHATTACHARYYA, MS.P.CHOWDHURY,ADVOCATES FOR COMPANY The Court : This application has been filed for realisation of sums for services rendered. The claim is based on purchase orders issued and bills raised by the petitioning creditor for works done. For non-payment by the company a statutory notice was issued on 30th August, 2012 to which a reply was given on 20th September, 2012 by the company. For continued non-payment this winding up petition has been filed. On a perusal of the pleadings of the parties what appears is that some of the bills do not match with the purchase order annexed. Some bills...
Saral Kumar Sen Gupta Vs. the Official Liquidator, High Court, Calcutt ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-2014
ORDER SHEET CA NO.175 of 2013 CP NO.12 of 1997 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF : CASION FINANCE & INVESTMENT (INDIA) LTD.(IN LIQN.) AND SARAL KUMAR SEN GUPTA VS THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR, HIGH COURT, CALCUTTA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 16th July, 2014. MR.ARIK BANERJEE, MR.S.GHOSH, ADVOCATES FOR MR.DIPAK APPLICANT. BASU, SR.ADVOCATE, MRS.R.SIKDAR, MRS.SMITA DAS DE,ADVOCATES FOR THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR The Court :-This application was filed by an Ex-Director of the company( in liquidation) and it was because of his efforts that huge sums have been collected by the Official Liquidator. Two investments viz. Indira Vikash Patra and Kisan Vikash Patra cannot be traced although sums are huge as the distinctive numbers are not known and where these securities are lying is also not known. The Registered office of the company is in Netaji Subhas Road, Kolkata and in all probability the government securities are lying with the G.P...
Vs. Sarat Chatterjee and Company (Vsp) Pvt. Ltd. and ors.Defenda
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-2014
ORDER SHEET G.A.No.898 of 2013 C.S.No.77 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE Dankuni Steels LTD.Versus Sarat Chatterjee & Company (VSP) PVT.LTD.& ORS.Plaintiff/Petitioner Defendants/Respondents BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 16th July, 2014. For Plaintiff: Mr.S.K.Kapoor & Mr.Ranjan Deb, Sr.Adversus with Mr.Ravi Kapoor, Ms.Noella Banerjee & Mr.Dipak Dey, Adversus For Defendant no.2 : Mr.Ahin Chowdhury, Mr.Surajit Nath Mitra & Mr.Ratnanko Banerjee, Sr.Adversus with Mr.D.N.Sharma, Ms.S.Mukhopadhaya & Mr.S.N.Pandey, Adversus 10,000 MT of metallurgical coke are involved. There are rival claims over these goods by Dankuni Steels Ltd., the plaintiff and the fourth defendant, Concast Steels LTD.on one hand and LMJ International Ltd., the second defendant on the other hand. A large quantity of metallurgical coke arrived by two vessels MV Filia Joy and MV Glovis Master on different dates. The fiRs.lot of materials came by MV Fil...
Kalpesh M. Shah Vs. C. I. T. Central Ii, Kolkata
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-2014
ITA No.8 of 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE KALPESH M. SHAH -VersusC.I.T. CENTRAL - II, KOLKATA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE DR. MRINAL KANTI CHAUDHURI Date : 16th July, 2014. Appearance: Mr.J.P.Khaitan, Sr.Adv.Mr.Sanjoy Bhowmik, Adv.Mr.C.S.Das, Adv...for the appellant. Md.Nizamuddin, Adv.Mr.S.N.Datta, Adv...for the respondent. The Court : The appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 31st August, 2004 passed by the learned income tax appellate Tribunal reversing the order passed by the CIT (Appeal) and thereby allowing the appeal preferred by the revenue. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Tribunal the assessee has come up in appeal. Briefly stated the facts and circumstances of the case are as follows: Search and seizure was conducted at the residence of the assessee on 24th August, 2000. A locker held in the joint names of the assessee and his wife with UTI Bank LTD.was opened a...
Hasi Saha Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.640 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE HASI SAHA Versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 15th July, 2014 Mr.Sanjay Saha, Advocate ..for the petitioner Mr.Sabhyasachi Roy Chowdhury, Advocate ..for the respondents The petitioner was a panel advocate of the State of West Bengal since 1992 till May, 2011. She is aggrieved because the bills raised by her 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 19 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 she is not entitled to the fees charged by her and to release such quantum of payment to the petitioner, as are found to be admissible. That would necessa...
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2014
ORDER SHEET CA No.187 of 2014 With CP No.179 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction IN THE MATTER OF : JESSOP AND Co.LTD.AND SUBRATA KUMAR BISWAS AND JESSOP & COMPANY LTD.. . Applicant. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 15th July, 2014. Mr.Jishnu Saha, Sr.Adv., Mr.Madhu Sudan Sarkar, Mr.Avik Dhar for petitioning creditor. Mr.Utpal Bose, Sr.Adv., Ms.Urmila Chakraborty, Ms.Ruby Jaiswal for the company. The Court : The 37 supporting creditors seek an order as passed on 8th July, 2014 in favour of Murli Raj Bhar that is to direct the company to secure its claim on account of gratuity by creating fixed deposits. Such order would have been passed if the case of the 37 supporting creditors was similar to that of Murli Raj Bhar. In the case of Murli Raj Bhar two several cheques amounting to the sums on account of gratuity had been issued which were dishonoured. Therefore, the claim crystallised and the amount was undisputed. It is only for this reason the order d...
Susil Kumar Mahata Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-15-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.639 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SUSIL KUMAR MAHATA Versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 15th July, 2014 Mr.Sanjay Saha, Advocate ..for the petitioner Mr.Sabhyasachi Roy Chowdhury, Advocate ..for the respondents The petitioner was a panel advocate of the State of West Bengal since 1984 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 27 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 ...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »