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.
Supriyo Bose Vs. Legal Remembrancer, Govt. of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.629 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SUPRIYO BOSE Versus LEGAL REMEMBRANCER, GOVT. OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 11th July, 2014 Mr.Abhijit Chatterjee, Senior Advocate with MRS.Amrita Sinha, 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 2007 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 4 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...
Asix Bank Limited Vs. Md. Rizwan Khan and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-2014
AP No.1050 of 2014 AP No.1051 of 2014 AP No.1052 of 2014 AP No.1053 of 2014 AP No.1054 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ASIX BANK LIMITED Versus Md.RIZWAN KHAN & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 11th July, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Sukrit Nag, Adv.Mr.Priyankar Saha, Adv.The Court : It has become a profitable exercise for some lawyers to put their credibility on the line and seek adjournments for clients who do not pay their creditORS.only to turn up on the next occasion and submit that they have no further instructions. So has it been in these matteRs.Since the petitioner claims that a sum in excess of Rs.15.83 lakh is due only on account of defaulted instalments and a sum in excess of Rs.97.10 lakh is due upon the termination of the five agreements covered in these matters and since the respondents are aware of the present proceedings and have made no attempt to pay, there will be an order of injunction in terms of prayer (d)...
Sri Ashim Kumar Haldar Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.635 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE Sr.ASHIM KUMAR HALDAR Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 11th July, 2014 Ms.Rina Banerjee, 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 1997 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 14 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...
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-2014
C.C.59 of 2014 W.P.1115 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Civil Jurisdiction (Contempt) Original Side SURENDRA BHANDARI Versus MRS.SOMA MUKHERJEE Petitioner Contemnor/Respondent BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA Date : 11th July, 2014. For the petitioner : Mr.Sakti Pada Jana, Advocate For the Contemnor/respondent : Mr.Jayotosh Majumdar with Mr.Pinaki Dhole, Advocates THE COURT : The instant contempt application has been filed by the writ petitioner complaining noncompliance of part of the directions passed by this Court on 26th June 2013 in W.P.No.1115 of 2011 whereby the concerned authority was directed to pay all admissible financial dues of the petitioner with effect from 20th August, 1996. Admittedly, the other part of the order passed by this Court on 14th June 2013 whereby direction was given upon the concerned authority for approving the service of the petitioner as Laboratory Assistant with R.P.Pandey effect from 20th August 1996 vice has already be...
K. D. Fabrics Private Limited and anr. Vs. State Bank of India and ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.602 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE K.D.FABRICS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. Versus STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 11th July, 2014 Mr.Swarup Banerjee, Adv..for the petitioners The petitioners are the auction purchaseRs.Despite issuance of sales certificate, the bank has not made over to them the title deed of the secured asset. It is prayed that the bank may be directed by a mandamus to register the sale certificate and to take steps for handing over the possession of the secured asset to them. None appears for the bank despite service. Affidavit of service filed in Court today may be retained with the records. It appears from the writ petition that a notice demanding justice dated June 5, 2014 has been submitted by the petitioners before the Authorised Officer, State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Management Branch, Nagaland House, 8th Floor, 11 & 13, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkat...
Mrinal Kanti Sardar Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.633 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE MRINAL KANTI SARDAR Versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 11th July, 2014 MRS.Soma Roy Chowdhuri, 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. Tha...
Udayan Mukherjee Vs. Siddhartha Chatterjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-2014
ORDER SHEET GA15342014 APOT2522014 PLA3452012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE GOODS OF : BELA CHATTOPADHYAY ALIAS BELA CHATTERJEE (DEC) -ANDUDAYAN MUKHERJEE -VSSIDDHARTHA CHATTERJEE BEFORE: The Hon'ble MR.BANERJEE, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 11th July, 2014. Mr.Sakya Sen, Advocate Mr.Nilanjana Adya, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.Swarnendu Ghosh, Advocate Mr.S.P.Brahmachari, Advocate Mr.R.K.Mitra, Advocate Mr.Debdut Mukherjee, Advocate for the respondent. The Court : The estate of Bela Chatterjee is being looked after by the executor. The executor made a complaint, the Demat account, maintained by Smt.Bela Chatterjee, during her lifetime with her son, Siddhartha Chatterjee, was being dealt with by Siddhartha Chatterjee to the exclusion of the estate. The learned single Judge permitted Siddhartha to deal with 50 per cent share. Hence, this appeal by the executor. We heard this matter on the last occasio...
Sri Chaitan Choudhury and anr. Vs. the Official Liquidator and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-2014
ORDER SHEET C.A.No.906 of 2010 With C.P.No.2 of 1987 C.A.No.26 of 2014 C.A.No.309 of 2013 C.A.No.321 of 2013 C.A.No.324 of 2014 C.A.No.358 of 2013 C.A.No.388 of 2013 C.A.No.39 of 2013 C.A.No.513 of 2013 C.A.No.59 of 2013 C.A.No.99 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction -- Re: THE BARANAGAR JUTE FACTORY PLC AND Sr.CHAITAN CHOUDHURY & ANR. Versus THE Official Liquidator & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA Date : 11th July, 2014. Mr.S.K.Kapur, Sr.Advocate, Mr.Ravi Kapur, Adv.appear and submit Mr.Debasish Kundu, Sr.Advocate, Mr.Joydeb Ghorai, Adv.appear and submit Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Sr.Advocate, Mr.Sarbapriya Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Rudrajit Sarkar, Adv.appear and submit Mr.Soumabho Ghosh, Adv.appears and submits Mr.Prasanta Naskar, Adv.appears and submits Mr.Atanu Roychowdhury, Adv.with Mr.Sanjib Mal, Adv.and Mr.Dibanath Dey, Adv.appear and submit Mr.Probal Mukherjee, Sr.Advocate appears and submits Mr.Aniruddha Agarwalla, Adv.appears and submits Ms.Manju...
Shyam Metalics and Energy Ltd. Vs. Siddhartha Narayan Misra
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-2014
ORDER SHEET APO1212014 CP7002013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SHYAM METALICS & ENERGY LTD.Versus SIDDHARTHA NARAYAN MISr.BEFORE: The Hon'ble MR.BANERJEE, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 11th July, 2014. Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Senior Advocate Mr.Sakya Sen, Advocate Mr.Nirmalya Dasgupta, Advocate Mr.Piyush Changia, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.Bidyut Kumar Banerjee, Advocate Mr.Chirantan Dawn, Advocate for the respondent. The Court : This winding-up petition would relate to a claim on account of commission made on behalf of the respondent. The respondent acted on behalf of the appellant as their agent for which he billed the appellant. The appellant did not pay despite notice of demand. Ultimately, the respondent filed a winding-up petition after service of statutory notice of demand. The learned Company Judge admitted the winding-up petition for Rs.23,31,980/-. Begin aggrieved, the appellant filed the instant appe...
M/S. Bengal Rolling Shutter and Engineering Works Vs. M/S. Dhariwal St ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-2014
1 ORDER SHEET APO No.140 of 2014 CP No.219 of 2003 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE In the Matter of : M/S.DHARIWAL STEEL PVT LTD -ANDM/S.BENGAL ROLLING SHUTTER & ENGINEERING WORKS Versus M/S.DHARIWAL STEEL PVT LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE,ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE, The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 11th July, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Rupak Ghosh with Mr.P.K.Sarogi, Ld. Advocates for the appellant. Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury with Mr.Dip Narayan Roychowdhury, ld. Advocates for the respondent. The Court :- One of us admitted the winding up petition vide judgment and order dated August 26, 2004 for Rs.60,97,535.50. The present appeal would have some nexus with the said order yet, the parties would jointly insist, this Bench should hear the appeal. Hence, we take up the hearing of this appeal. The facts involved in this case are somewhat peculiar and seldom found. The appellant filed a winding up petition as against the respondent that the order...
- ‹ Prev
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- Next ›
- Last »