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.
Srei Equipment Finance Limited Vs. Oxygen Infrastructures and Develope ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-04-2014
AP No.1453 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE LIMITED Versus OXYGEN INFRASTRUCTURES & DEVELOPERS PVT.LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 4th July, 2014. Appearance: Mr.S.Banerjee, Adv.The Court : The respondent is not represented despite previous service. The petitioner says that the asset covered by the agreement is in the possession of a third party who, however, does not claim any title over the asset and acknowledges the petitioners title over the same. If such is the case and there is no dispute raised by the third party over the petitioners exclusive right to the asset in question and there is no resistance offered by such third party to the receiver, the receiver will take possession of the asset and keep it at a place to be provided by the petitioner upon ensuring that the petitioner does not have use of the asset in any manner without the previous leave of Court. If, however, any mo...
Srei Equipment Finance Limited Vs. Arunendu Sarkar
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-04-2014
AP No.123 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE LIMITED -VersusARUNENDU SARKAR Appearance: Mr.Satarup Banerjee, Adv...for the petitioner. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : July 4, 2014. The Court : The respondents are not represented despite previous service. On April 21, 2014 an order was passed directing the receiver to take possession of the asset covered by the agreement from the third parties in possession thereof since the respondents had apparently agreed that the petitioner should take possession of the asset and the third parties in possession of the asset did not claim any lien over the same. The petitioner informs the Court that an appeal has been preferred from the order dated April 21, 2014. It appears that the third parties in possession of the assets have resisted the receiver in taking possession of the asset. One of the pitfalls of an arbitration agreement and, in particular, in...
In the Matter Of: Madhusudan Bag Vs. Aparupa Poddar (AfrIn Ali) and or ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-04-2014
ORDER SHEET EP No.1 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Election Petition Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF: MADHUSUDAN BAG Versus APARUPA PODDAR (AFRIN ALI) AND ORS BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 4th July, 2014. Appearance: Mr.K.Chanda, Adv.Mr.Kumar Jyoti Tewari, Adv.Mr.Tarun Jyoti Tewari, Adv.for the petitioner Mr.Kishore Datta, Sr.Adv.Mr.R.Chaturvedi, Adv.Mr.S.Banerjee, Adv.Mr.S.N.Pandey, Adv.for the respondent no.1 Md.Rezaul Hossain, Adv.for the State. The Court : This election petition has been filed, inter alia, praying for a declaration of the respondent no.1 as purported return candidate from 29 Arambagh (SC) Parliamentary Constituency is illegal and the declaration is to be cancelled. The basis of the petition appears to be that Afrin Ali having the maiden name Aparupa Poddar renounced her original Hindu religion and converted herself from Hindu to Muslim following the rituals in 2007. She got married to Md.Sakir Ali after being converted to Islam. F...
Nandlal Giya and anr. Vs. P.K. Kanchan and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-04-2014
ORDER SHEET CC66of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Contempt) ORIGINAL SIDE NANDLAL GIYA & ANR. Versus P.K.KANCHAN & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 4th July, 2014. Mr.Ahin Chowdhury, Sr.Adv.Mr.S.S.Banerjee, Adv.Mr.R.Sarkar, Adv.Mr.S.Ghose, Adv.Mr.A.Agarwalla, Adv..for the petitioneRs.Mr.S.Bose, Adv.Ms.Ranjana Guha, Adv.Mr.Raj Sekhar Basu, Adv..for the respondent nos.1to 6. Mr.P.Singh, Adv.Mr.S.Singh, Adv..for the respondent nos.7 & 8. The Court: Prima facie there appears to be violation of the orders dated 7th May, 2014 and 16th May, 2014. On a reading of the two orders it is absolutely plain that this Court had directed inspection of the bags as well as the bales. An inspection report was to be filed in this Court by 20th June, 2014. However, it appears from a letter dated 28th May, 2004 of Mr.A.K.Singh, Deputy Director (Quality Assurance).D.G.S.and D. Chandigarh that he was finding it difficult to interpret the Court orders as to whether ins...
ishwari Prosad Singh Roy Vs. Ms. Sreemati Mukherjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-04-2014
GA No.1845 of 2014 WITH CS45of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL SIDE ISHWARI PROSAD SINGH ROY Versus Ms.SREEMATI MUKHERJEE & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 4th July, 2014. Mr.Debdutta Sen,Advocate appeaRs.Mr.Dhruba Ghosh,Advocate appeaRs.The Court : - An application has been taken out by the defendant No.1 series for amendment of the plaint by recording the death of Rudradeb Mukherjee and to bring on record the legal heirs of Rudradeb Mukherjee. Mr.Rudradeb Mukherjee is one of the executors and beneficiaries under the Will. It appears that in an earlier proceeding the wife of the original defendant No.1 was recognized as the only legal representative and, accordingly, she was substituted in the said proceeding which is now pending before the City Civil Court in relation to an eviction proceeding instituted by the plaintiff. The instant suit is for eviction of a licensee consequent upon the death of the original defendant. Mr.Debdutta Sen,learned Counsel ap...
Damodar Rampetitioner Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.Respondents
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-03-2014
ORDER SHEET W.P.No.482 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE DAMODAR RAM Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.Petitioner Respondents BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BISWANATH SOMADDER Date : 3rd July, 2014. For Petitioner : Mr.Tapas Kr. Barman with Mr.Biswadip Ghosh, Adv.For State Respondents : Mr.Sadhan Roy Chowdhury, Sr.Adv.with Mr.T.M.Siddiqui, Adv.Let the report in the form of an affidavit, filed in Court today on behalf of the respondent Nos.3 and 4, be taken on record. Perusing the same, it appears that the stand of the Registrar of Cooperative Societies, West Bengal, taken in terms of his memo dated 25th May, 2010 and 26th September, 2013 is correct. However, the concerned department requires some time since it is required to be determined as to whether the petitioner, in fact, has rendered service for at least 240 days in each of the 10 years so that he could get benefit of the memo dated 23rd April, 2010. In such circumstances, this Cour...
The Naihati Jute Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-03-2014
ORDER SHEET GA NO.1355 OF2014WITH CS NO.85 OF2014IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE THE NAIHATI JUTE MILLS Co.LTD.Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 3rd July, 2014. Mr.A.Mitra, senior advocate, Mr.A.Mukherjee, Mr.D.Jainappear. Mr.K.K. MaityappeaRs.Mr.I.DasguptaappeaRs.The Court : The facts of this case are similar to GA No.2612 of 2013, CS No.304 of 2013 [Hooghly Infrastructure PVT.LTD.versus Union of India & Ors.].in which an interim order was passed by Patherya, J. on 10th September, 2013 and also similar to the facts in TA No.3 of 2014, T No.12 of 2014 [Reliance Jute Mills (International) LTD.versus Union of India & Ors.].in which this Court passed an order on 17th January, 2014. The following order was passed on 17th January, 2014 : xxxx On 10th September, 2013, in the other suit, on the said facts, this court passed an interim order restraining the respondent no.3 from recovering from the petitio...
Vishnu Agencies P. Ltd. and anr. Vs. L.i.C.i.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-03-2014
ORDER SHEET G.A.No.1990 of 2014 W.P.No.1538 of 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE VISHNU AGENCIES P. LTD.& ANR. Versus L.I.C.I.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 3rd July, 2014. Appearance : Mr.S.K. Basu, Adv.Mr.P.Majumder, Adv. for the petitioner Mr.D.K. Kundu, Adv.Mr.A.Basu, Adv. for the LICI The Court : The petitioners have applied for amendment of their writ petition. In this writ petition they have prayed essentially that the respondent be directed to carry out the proceedings and conduct Case No.E.O./230/0901 in due process of law and prescribed under law. It appears that such case has been proceeded with and as a result an order of eviction of the petitioner was passed. By an interim order dated 3rd August, 2005 there was a direction that all steps taken thereafter by the respondent will abide by this writ petition. The petitioners seek to add grounds of challenge to such eviction order by way of amendment that would e...
Olive Tea Plantation Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Harsh Bajoria and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-03-2014
ORDER SHEET APO No.150 of 2014 WITH CS No.316 of 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE OLIVE TEA PLANTATION PVT.LTD.& ORS.Versus HARs.BAJORIA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 3rd July, 2014. Appearance : Mr.Jishnu Chaudhury, Adv.Mr.Chayan Gupta, Adv.Mr.Arik Basu, Adv.Mr.S.K.Kundu, Adv.Mr.Anirudha Agarwalla, Adv.for the appellants. Mr.Bishwambhar Jha, Adv.for the respondent Bank. The Court: This appeal would arise out of an order of dismissal of the suit which the plaintiff kept pending for a decade. The records would reveal, C.S.No.316 of 2004 was not ready even after ten years as the plaintiff did not take any step for service of writ of summons. Mr.Jishnu Chaudhury, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/plaintiff would, however, inform this Court, by an order dated May 8, 2006 the service of writ of summons upon the defendant No.1 and 6 was waived. Defendant No.7 was all thr...
Bonanza Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Manish Jahunjhunwala
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-03-2014
GA No.1529 of 2014 CS No.157 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE BONANZA INFRASTRUCTURE PVT.LTD.Versus MANISH JAHUNJHUNWALA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 3rd July, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Arindam Mukherjee, Advocate Mr.Avirup Sarkar, Advocate The Court: The plaintiff, upto 24th April, 2013, lent and advanced to the defendant diveRs.sums of money. The defendant was required to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum. The amount due and payable by the defendant to the plaintiff as on 31st March, 2014 inclusive of interest was Rs.9,65,85,977/- after giving credit to a sum of only Rs.11 lakhs repaid by them. The affidavit of service is on record. Mr.Mukherjee, learned Advocate for the plaintiff, submits that the defendant has been duly served. None appears for them. Learned counsel brings to my notice a statement of accounts signed by the plaintiff through its Director, Mr.Manisha Gupta that the aforesaid amount of Rs.9,65,...
- ‹ Prev
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- Next ›
- Last »