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.
The Calcutta Stock Exchange Association Ltd. Vs. Kiran Parasrampuria
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-2014
ORDER SHEET GA No.2270 of 2014 WITH CS No.248 of 2002 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE THE CALCUTTA STOCK EXCHANGE ASSOCIATION LTD.Versus KIRAN PARASRAMPURIA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 24th July, 2014. Appearance : Mr.R.Ghose, Adv.Mr.Paritosh Sinha, Adv.Mr.S.Shah, Adv.Mr.P.Banerjee, Adv.for the plaintiff The Court : The application at the behest of the plaintiff is for substituted service under Order 5 Rule 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The plaintiff lodged writ of summons. The Deputy Sheriff has submitted a report dated June 23, 2014 which is annexure-D to the petitions at page-11 stating that, the writ of summons through the Bailiff could not be served due to the non-availability of the defendant at the stated address and no identification of the defendant by the identifier of the plaintiff. So far as postal service is concerned, it is reported on undelivered packet marking No such person in this addres...
Suresh Kr. Gupta and anr. Vs. Samarendra Nath Shaw and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-2014
1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Original Side Before: The Honble Justice Debangsu Basak C.S.No.461 of 1984 Suresh Kr. Gupta & Anr. versus Samarendra Nath Shaw & ORS.For the Plaintiffs For the Defendant Nos.5(a) to 5(j) and 6 : Mr.Swapan Kumar Mullick, Advocate Mr.Sudhakar Prasad, Advocate : Mr.Swarnendu Ghosh, Advocate Mr.S.Sen Barat, Advocate Heard on : July 10, 2014 Judgment on : July 24, 2014 DEBANGSU BASAK, J.:- The plaintiffs claimed that, a consent decree passed in Suit No.850 of 1982 in Appeal No.165 of 1983 was null and void, not binding upon the plaintiffs, and should be set aside. The plaintiff claimed other reliefs also in the suit. The plaintiffs and the original Defendant No.5 were brotheRs.They entered into two several agreements both dated March 25, 1975 with the Defendant Nos.1 to 4 for purchasing two immovable properties. The plaintiffs claimed that, during the subsistence of such agreement the original Defendant No.1 along with his...
Shyama Saran Bhalotia and ors. Vs. Essem Enterprises Pvt Ltd and ors
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-2014
1 ORDER SHEET GA No.2251 of 2014 APD No.137 of 2014 CS No.140 of 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SHYAMA SARAN BHALOTIA & ORS.Versus ESSEM ENTERPRISES PVT LTD & ORS BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE,ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE, The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 24th July, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Jayanta Mitra, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury and Mr.Sarbopriya Mukherjee Ld. Advocates for the appellant. Mr.S.N.Mookerjee,Sr.Advocate with Mr.K.T.Thakkar ld. Advocate For the respondent. The Court :- This is an application for dismissal of the appeal principally on the ground, it was not maintainable as appropriate advelorem court fee has not been paid. Mr.Jayanta Kumar Mitra, learned Senior Counsel would submit, the appellant duly paid the Court fee and in any event, if this Court ultimately finds, any additional amount is to be paid, the appellant is ready and willing to pay the same. Mr.S.N. Mookerjee, learned Senior Counsel appearing fo...
Shyama Saran Bhalotia and ors. Vs. Fortune Enterprises Private Ltd.and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-2014
1 ORDER SHEET GA No.2250 of 2014 APD No.138 of 2014 CS No.141 of 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SHYAMA SARAN BHALOTIA & ORS.Versus FORTUNE ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LTD.& ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE,ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE, The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 24th July, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Jayanta Mitra, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury and Mr.Sarbopriya Mukherjee Ld. Advocates for the appellant. Mr.S.N.Mookerjee,Sr.Advocate with Mr.K.T.Thakkar ld. Advocate For the respondent. The Court :- This is an application for dismissal of the appeal principally on the ground, it was not maintainable as appropriate advelorem court fee has not been paid. Mr.Jayanta Kumar Mitra, learned Senior Counsel would submit, the appellant duly paid the Court fee and in any event, if this Court ultimately finds, any additional amount is to be paid, the appellant is ready and willing to pay the same. Mr.S.N. Mookerjee, learned Senior Counsel appear...
C.i.T Kolkata Iii Vs. M/S. Warren Industrial Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-2014
ITA No.22 of 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE C.I.T KOLKATA III -VersusM/S.WARREN INDUSTRIAL LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA Date : 24th July, 2014. Appearance: Mr.P.K.Bhowmik, Adv...for the appellant. Mr.J.P.Khaitan, Sr.Adv.Mr.Sanjoy Bhowmik, Adv.Mr.C.S.Das, Adv...for the respondent. The Court : The subject-matter of challenge in this appeal is a judgment and order dated 13th October, 2006 by which the learned income tax appellate tribunal held that imposition of penalty was totally illegal and improper. Aggrieved by the order of the learned tribunal, the revenue has come up in appeal. It appears that when the appeal was admitted the following question was formulated: 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in law in deleting the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act admittedly the...
Warren Tea Limited Vs. Citii, Kolkata and anr
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-24-2014
ITA No.48 of 2006 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE WARREN TEA LIMITED -VersusCIT-II, KOLKATA & ANR BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA Date : 24th July, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Abhratosh Majumdar, Adv.Ms.Nilanjana Pal (Banerjee).Adv...for the appellant. Ms.Asha G. Gutgutia, Adv...for the respondent. The Court : The subject-matter of this appeal is a judgment and order dated 30th September, 2005 passed by the learned Income tax Appellate Tribunal dismissing an appeal preferred by the assessee and agreeing with the views of the CIT (A) and the assessing officer that the interest earned by the assessee cannot be taken into account for the purpose of giving benefit under Section 33AB. At all the stages inspiration was drawn from the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Pandian Chemicals Limited versus CIT reported in 2003 (262) ITR278SC wherein Their Lordships held that in extending benefit unde...
Coastal India Trading Systems Limited Vs. I.M.C. Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-23-2014
Form No.J.(2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Original Side Present : The Honble Acting Chief Justice Justice Ashim Kumar Banerjee And The Honble Mr.Justice Arijit Banerjee A.P.O.No.122 of 2014 C.P.No.12 of 2014 Coastal India Trading systems Limited versus I.M.C.Limited For the Appellant : Mr.Tilak Bose, Senior Advocate Mr.D.N.sharma, Advocate Ms.Pritha Basu, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr.Pratap Chatterjee, Senior Advocate Mr.A.K.Roy, Advocate Mr.Chirag Dave, Advocate Mr.Surajit Biswas, Advocate Heard on : June 20, July 3, 4, 2014 Judgment on : July 23, 2014 [[[ Ashim Kumar Banerjee, A.C.J.The parties to the above Appeal entered into a contract in which the Appellant was supposed to act as agent of the respondent to help them in giving appropriate advice and act as their agent for which they would claim Retainer fees. The appellant would contend, a sum of Rs.635583/- became due and payable on account of retainers fees apart from the bills for reimbursemen...
MerlIn Orihects Ltd. Vs. Educo Ventures Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-23-2014
G.A.No.846 of 2014 G.A.No.847 of 2014 C.S.No.96 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Civil Jurisdiction Original Side MERLIN ORIHECTS LTD.versus EDUCO VENTURES PVT.LTD.For petitioner : Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Sr.Advocate Ms.Jishnu Chowdhury, Advocate Mr.Satadeep Bhattacharjee, Advocate Mr.Soumabho Ghosh, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.Pratap Chatterjee, Sr.Advocate Mr.Jishnu Saha Sr.Advocate Mr.Sabyasachi Chowdhury, Advocate Mr.Anirban Roy, Advocate Mr.V.V.V.Sastry, Advocate Heard on Judgment on : 26.06.2014 : 23.07.2014 I.P.MUKERJI, J. Two applications made by the plaintiff were heard together by me. The fiRs.application (G.A.846 of 2014) contained the following prayeRs.a) A fit and proper person be appointed as Receiver/Special Officer and the Receiver/Special Officer so appointed be directed to do the following:(i) Make an inventory of the suit premises situated at Mouza Uttar Khazirhat, P.S.Bishnupur, District: 24- Parganas (south) more fully described in Annexure A to the plain...
Tpg Equity Management Pvt. Ltd. Vs. O/L
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-23-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE CA400OF2013WITH BIFR520of 1992 CA409of 2014 BHARAT PROCESS & MECHAMICALS ENGG. LTD.(IN LIQN.) AND TPG EQUITY MANAGEMENT PVT.LTD.-VSO/L BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 23rd July, 2014. Mr.S.N.Mookherjee, Sr.Advocate Mr.Ratnanko Banerjee, Sr.Advocate Mr.Mainak Basu, Advocate Mr.Reetobroto Mitra, Advocate Mr.Bijoy Bhartia, Advocate Mr.U.Ghosh, Advocate Ms.M.Bose, Advocate .for Secured Creditors Mr.Shiv Shankar Banerjee, Advocate Ms.Rituparna Majumder, Advocate Mr.Gora Chand Roychowdhury, Advocate Mr.Soumava Basu, Advocate for respondent/OMd.Mr.Vipul Kundalia, Advocate Ms.Sonal Shah, Advocate for joint Administrators Mr.Rajsekhar Mantha, Advocate for Workmen Mr.B.Mohanti, Advocate Ms.Ruma Sikder, Advocate for O/L. The Court :- While deciding the issue raised by the applicant Counsel for OMd.seeks to rely on certain documents which are according to him germane to the issue with regard to his right to exploit the m...
Bengal India Global Infrastructure Ltd. and ors. Vs. Andhra Bank and o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-23-2014
ORDER SHEET TA NO.126 OF2014CS NO.114 OF2014IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE BENGAL INDIA GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.& ORS.Versus ANDHRA BANK & ORS. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 23rd July, 2014. Mr.P.K.Roy, senior advocate, Ms.S.Mukherjeeappear. Mr.S.BanerjeeappeaRs.Mr.R.S.Mantha, senior advocate, Mr.N.Thakurappear. The Court : Mr.R.S. Mantha, learned senior advocate appearing for the bank questions the jurisdiction of the Court. He argues that the impugned decision has been taken in accordance with statute. The statute does not permit intervention by the Civil Court. Secondly, he submits that it cannot be said at this stage that the impugned order has been passed without reasons because the Grievance Redressal Committee has concurred with the decision of Willful Defaulters Identification Committee. The Court would have to look at the decision of the latter committee to identify the reasons. As far as the fiRs.point raised...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »