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.
Tata Capital Financial Services Limited Vs. Nimai Maity and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-14-2014
AP No.1288 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE TATA CAPITAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED Versus NIMAI MAITY & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : July 14, 2014. Appearance: Mr.S.Banerjee, Adv.The Court : The respondents are not represented despite being represented on April 11, 2014 when a payment of Rs.49,800/- was made to the petitioner. The order of April 11, 2014 recorded that a sum of Rs.3.35 lakh remained due as at that date only on account of defaulted instalments. Since the respondents wanted to make payment of a further sum of Rs.1 lakh within a fortnight from April 11, 2014, the matter was adjourned. When the matter was next taken up on April 28, 2014, the respondents were not represented and an order was made for a sum of Rs.2 lakh to be paid by May 8, 2014. Since the respondents show no interest in the matter and a substantial sum remains due upon the termination of the agreement, the receiver is directe...
Sk. MoinuddIn Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-14-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.636 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SK. MOINUDDIN Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 15th July, 2014 Mr.Syed Nazmul Hossain, 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 2003 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 8 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 ne...
Apeejay Private Limited Vs. Uco Bank
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-14-2014
CS No.140 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE APEEJAY PRIVATE LIMITED Versus UCO BANK BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 14th July, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Saumabho Ghosh, Advocate Mr.B.Kumar, Advocate Mr.Sourjya Roy, Advocate The Court: By an order dated 24th February, 2014 passed by Soumen Sen, J., the suit was directed to appear in the list as For Orders after three weeks. The Special Referee was directed to file his report in court on the returnable date. Another order was passed by his lordship on 18th March, 2014. It noted that by an order passed by me on 13th January, 2014, sitting in the Interlocutory Court, time for the Special Referee to make and publish his report was extended till 30th June, 2014. The suit was directed to appear in the monthly list of July, 2014. Thereafter, by an order of this court (Interlocutory Court) dated 25th June, 2014 such time was extended till 31st December, 2014. When this court was ap...
Vs. State of West Bengal and Orsresp
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-14-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.168 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE UPEN DAS Petitioner Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS Respondents BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL Date : 14th July, 2014. For Petitioner : Mr.Bijan Behari Roy, Advocate For Respondents : Mr.Amal Kumar Sen, Advocate MRS.Ashima Seal, Advocate The Court : At the very outset it is submitted by Mr.Amal Kumar Sen, learned advocate for the CSTC, on instruction, that pursuant to a disciplinary proceeding, wherein the petitioner was given liberty to represent, order of termination has been issued by Depot Manager, Manicktala Depot, of Calcutta State Transport Corporation on 14th May, 2014 terminating his services. the present writ petition, affirmed Submission is, in such circumstances, on 26th February, 2014 has become infructuous. Mr.Bijan Behari Roy, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that since appeal has already been preferred against the order ...
Kuber Tobacco Products Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Kuber Jeans India
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-14-2014
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE GA NO.747 OF2014WITH CS NO.71 OF2014KUBER TOBACCO PRODUCTS PVT.LTD.& ANR. Versus KUBER JEANS INDIA GA NO.836 OF2014WITH CS NO.87 OF2014CC NO.44 OF2014CC NO.45 OF2014GA NO.1325 OF2014KUBER TOBACCO PRODUCTS PVT.LTD.& ANR. Versus KUBER METAL INSULATION GA NO.1324 OF2014WITH CS NO.71 OF2014KUBER TOBACCO PRODUCTS PVT.LTD.& ANR. Versus KUBER JEANS INDIA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 14th July, 2014. Mr.D.GhoshappeaRs.Ms.M.Agarwal, Mr.B.Manotappear. The Court : Supplementary affidavits filed in Court today be taken on record. After having heard Mr.Ghosh and MRS.Agarwal, learned counsel for the respective parties, the following state of affairs emerges. The plaintiffs were the registered proprietor of the label mark Kuber in one or more categories and of the word mark Kuber in some other category or categories. They obtained their registration on 16th July, 2005 with effect from 9th ...
Monoranjan Roy Vs. Lic Housing Finance Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-14-2014
GA No.2140 of 2014 CS No.244 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE MONORANJAN ROY Versus LIC HOUSING FINANCE LTD.& ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 14th July, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Anirban Roy, Advocate Mr.Asish Chakraborty, Advocate Mr.Saumabho Ghosh, Advocate Mr.Pradyot Kr. Das, Advocate The Court: This interim application filed by the plaintiff challenges an CIBIL Consumer Credit Information Report dated 22nd February, 2014 published by the second defendant stating, inter alia, the following about the plaintiff :STATUS Suit filed/wilful default : Suit filed According to Mr.Roy, learned Advocate appearing for the plaintiff, neither a suit has been filed by anybody against his client nor his client is in wilful default. Hence the above remark of the second defendant is erroneous and should be directed to be deleted. Mr.Chakraborty, learned Advocate for the fiRs.defendant, submits that the plaintiff had borrowed money f...
M/S. Raitani Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-14-2014
ORDER SHEET GA21122014 APOT3322014 AP4572013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.RAITANI ENGINEERING WORKS PVT.LTD.Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble MR.BANERJEE, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 14th July, 2014. Mr.Dipak Bose, Senior Advocate Mr.Bijon Majumder, Adovcoate for the appellant. Mr.Moloy Kumar Das, Advocate Mrs.Arpita Banerjee, Advocate for the respondent. The Court : The appellant is a contractor under the railway. Disputes and differences arose resulting in claims and counter-claiMs.According to the railway, Rs.2.5 crores was due whereas the appellant would claim Rs.7 crores. The Arbitrator heard the matter. Before publishing the award, he left this world. The new Arbitrator is yet to take charge of the arbitration. At this stage, the appellant has come up, inter alia, praying for stoppage of deduction of bills pending with the respondent receivable in respect of other contracts pertainin...
BipIn Kr.Vohra Vs. Allahabad Bank and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-14-2014
ORDER SHEET GA No.2128 of 2013 WITH CS No.240 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE BIPIN KR.VOHRA Versus ALLAHABAD BANK & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 14th July, 2014. Appearance : Mr.Ranjan Deb, Sr.Adv.Mr.Debdut Mukherjee, Adv.Ms.Koeliya Banerjee, Adv.for the petitioner Mr.Sudeep Pal Choudhury, Adv.for the respondent No.1 Mr.Victor Dutta, Adv.for the respondent No.7 The Court : In a suit for compensations on account of defamation and other reliefs on the plaintiffs files an interlocutory application for an order restraining the defendants from making any publication of the photographs of the plaintiff in the newspaper. At the time of the application being considered by an interim order dated July 23, 2013, the Court restrained the defendant Nos.2 to 8 from publishing photographs of the petitioner. The application is coming up for final disposal after completion of affidavits. The defendant No.1 and 7 has used...
Vs. Narpat Bokadiadefendant/Responden
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-14-2014
ORDER SHEET G.A.No.453 of 2011 C.S.No.5 of 2011 G.A.No.1626 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SANATAN MERCHANTS PVT.LTD.Versus NARPAT BOKADIA Plaintiff/Petitioner Defendant/Respondent BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 14th July, 2014. For Plaintiff/Petitioner : Mr.Ahin Choudhuri, Sr.Adv.with Mr.Souvik Majumdar & Ms.Tannistha Lahiri, Adversus For Defendant/Respondent : Mr.S.Deb with Mr.B.Ghosh, Mr.S.Sengupta & Mr.A.K.Gandhi, Adversus This [G.A.No.453 of 2011].is a judgment upon admission application claiming Rs.1,75,27,890/- along with interest. There are also prayers for attachment before judgement. There is absolutely no dispute that from time to time the plaintiff supplied diveRs.quantities of goods to the defendant. From the documents annexed to the petition, I find that from time to time the defendant has confirmed the sum due and owing by him to the plaintiff by signing statements of accounts along with the plainti...
Dagcon (India) Pvt Ltd. Vs. B.C. Sen and Co Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-14-2014
1 ORDER SHEET APO No.172 of 2014 CS No.95 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE DAGCo.(INDIA) PVT LTD.Versus B.C.SEN & CO LIMITED BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE,ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE, The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 14th July, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Surajit Nath Mitra, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Anirban Roy ld. Advocate for the appellant. Mr.Pramit Bag, Mr.Soumava Ghosh and Mr.Sujit Kumar, ld. Advocates for the respondent. The Court :- The present appeal would relate to a portion of premises admittedly outside the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. The parties entered into an agreement for sale under which the appellant was to sell and building the respondent being was premises No.to purchase 143A, a part Rashbehari of the Avenue, Kolkata. The respondent is a jewelary house. They intend to open a showroom in the said building. The respondent would contend, they are in possession and interior decoration work is going on. The appella...
- ‹ Prev
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- Next ›
- Last »