Kolkata Court August 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.
Dr. Md. Abu Jafar GaIn @ Abu Jafar GaIn Vs. Calcutta Electricity Corpo ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-2014
ORDER SHEET WP358of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE DR. Md.ABU JAFAR GAIN @ ABU JAFAR GAIN Versus CALCUTTA ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LTD.& ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 14th August, 2014. Mr.Raja Basu Chowdhury, Adv.Mr.Jayanta Samanta, Adv..for the petitioner. Mr.Rita Mukherjee, Adv..for the CESC The Court: In spite of service the private respondents did not appear in the second call of the petition. The grievance of the writ petitioner is that the private respondents were preventing installation of electric meter at the meter board where the other meters are located. The CESC Authorities have no objection to install an electric meter for the writ petitioner at the space where other electric meters are located. The writ petitioner and the CESC Authorities apprehend that the CESC Authorities will be prevented from gaining access to such place to install the meter. The writ petitioner is entitled to electric supply. ...
Akhtar HossaIn and ors. Vs. the Board of Wakf, West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.48 of 1999 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE AKHTAR HOSSAIN & ORS.Versus THE BOARD OF WAKF, WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 14th August, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Bibek Jyoti Basu, Adv.Mr.Uttam Kumar De, Adv.Mr.N.Haque, Adv.For the petitioner nos.1(a) to 1(d).3(a) and 3(b).Mr.Aniruddha Chatterjee, Adv.Mr.Anjan Banerjee, Adv.For the respondent no.4. Mr.N.Chatterjee, Adv.For the respondent Nos.5 and 6 Mr.Puspendu Bikash Shaw, Adv.For the added respondent. The Court :- Originally the writ petition was filed by three persons. With the death of the petitioner no.1 his heirs and legal representatives were substituted and four persons were included as petitioner Nos.1(A) to 1(D).The original petitioner no.3 died on July 3, 2005. He was substituted by the petitioner Nos.3(a) and 3(b).It is submitted that the petitioner no.2 is dead. The writ petition was dismissed for default and was restored at the ins...
Satya Sandhi and anr. Vs. Reserve Bank of India
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-2014
ORDER SHEET G.A.No.2526 of 2014 W.P.No.137 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SATYA SANDHI & ANR. Versus RESERVE BANK OF INDIA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 14th August, 2014. Appearance : Mr.Sandip Bhattacharyya, Adv. for the petitioner Mr.Tapas Midya,Adv.Mr.Subhodip Majumder, Adv. for the respondent No.2 Mr.Malay Kr. Singh, Adv.Ms.Soma Roy, Adv. for Added respondent The Court : A writ petition is filed by the writ petitioner seeking release with regard to alleged impersonation of the writ petitioner No.1 in a bank account. In such writ petition a person interested in the result of the writ petition applies for addition of party and an order dated March 25, 2014 is passed allowing such person to be added as a party. The order dated March 25, 2014 is implemented by the department. The original writ petition is amended in terms of the order dated March 25, 2014. On April 4, 2014 the respondent No.5 is added to the wri...
Rajib Kumar Munsi and anr. Vs. Reserve Bank of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-2014
ORDER SHEET W.P.No.700 of 2012 G.A.No.3342 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE RAJIB KUMAR MUNSI & ANR. Versus RESERVE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 14th August, 2014. Appearance : Mr.Debojyoti Basu, Adv.Mr.S.Dewanji, Adv. for the petitioner Mr.Anjan Kumar Paul, Adv. for the S.B.I.The Court : The grievance of the writ petitioner is that the bank is wrongfully resiling from a One Time Settlement Scheme (OTS).It is submitted on behalf of the writ petitioner that it enjoyed credit facilities from State Bank of India. The bank issued a notice dated April 17, 2012 under its OTS for Medium and Small Micro Enterprises. The scheme is called SBI OTS-MSME2012 By the notice dated April 17, 2012 the bank called upon the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.12,58,825/-. The notice provided that, the application for OTS will be processed only on deposit of minimum 5 percent of the outstanding as on the date of the acco...
United Bank of India and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-14-2014
ORDER SHEET GA3184of 2013 With WP1061of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE UNITED BANK OF INDIA AND ANR. VERSUS STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.BEFORE: The Honble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date: 14th August, 2014 Appearance : Mr.Sandip Kumar Bhattacharyya, Adv.Mr.Abdul Masood, Adv.Mr.Suman Basu, Adv..for the petitioneRs.Mr.Ajay Krishna Chatterjee, Sr.Adv.Mr.Aniruddha Roy, Adv.Mr.U.Chakraborti, Adv.Mr.N.Dasgupta, Adv..for the respondents. The Court: The writ petitioner, a bank seeks directions on the respondent no.6 to render the bank assistance with regard to its secured assets in terms of Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act, 2002).The writ petitioner approached the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate under Section 14 of SARFAESI ACT, 2002. The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate directed the Police Authorities to render help to the petitioner for taking pos...
Vs. Sales Tax Officer, Park Street Charge and ors.Responden
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-13-2014
ORDER SHEET W.P.No.490 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE GNG EXPORTS Versus SALES TAX OFFICER, PARK STREET CHARGE & ORS.Petitioner Respondents BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 13th August, 2014. For Petitioner : Mr.S.K.Chakraborty with Mr.Piyal Gupta, Adversus For Respondents : Mr.Abhratosh Majumdar with Mr.P.Dudharia, Adversus The order of the West Bengal Commercial Taxes Appellate & Revisional Board dated 10th February, 2014 has to be set aside. I do not feel any necessity of inviting affidavits because the error in the order is on the face of it. No affidavit can improve it. Moreover, filing of affidavits would only delay matteRs.A Division Bench of our Court in the case of Shri Anil Kumar Dutta & ORS.versus Additional Member, Board of Revenue, West Bengal reported in 1967 XX STC 520 remarked as follows : * * * * The omission to date the form, when the transactions were all dated, did not make the non-dating of the f...
In the Matter of Atw Nirman Private Limited (In Liqn) Vs. O/L, High Co ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-13-2014
ORDER SHEET G.A.No.1276 of 2014 C.S.No.131 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE IN THE MATTER OF ATW NIRMAN PRIVATE LIMITED (IN LIQN) Versus O/L, HIGH COURT, CALCUTTA. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 13th August, 2014. Appearance : Mr.S.Banerjee, Adv. for the petitioner The Court : In spite of service, none appears on behalf of the defendants or any one of them. The plaintiff states that by an agreement of sale and transfer of shares between the plaintiff and the defendant No.1, the defendant No.1 was required and obliged to transfer 9500 number of equity shares of the defendant No.2 held and owned by it upon payment of consideration of Rs.1,99,50,000/-. In terms of the sale agreement the plaintiff has received 3650 shares of defendant No.2 being held and owned by the defendant No.1. Although the defendants 1 has acknowledged the payment and his obligation to transfer the said shares the said defendant No.1 has failed an...
Mps Greenary Developers Limited Vs. Ots Limited and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-13-2014
ORDER SHEET APO2342014 CS432014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE MPS GREENARY DEVELOPERS LIMITED Versus OTS LIMITED & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.MANJULA CHELLUR The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE Date : 13th August, 2014. Mr.Mainak Bose, Advocate Mr.Gourav Das, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Sr.Advocate Mr.Soumabha Ghose, Advocate Mr.Nikunj Berlia, Advocate for the respondent. The Court : The plaintiff being the respondent filed a suit for recovery of money payable by four different companies that the appellant would object. According to the appellant, it was misjoinder of cause of action and misjoinder of parties. From the cause title we find, the four companies being the defendant nos.1 to 4 would have a common promoter-director being the defendant no.5. The plaint would show, all the four companies were being managed by the defendant no.5 from the office at Calcutta within the jurisdiction of this Court. As per the agr...
Cts Industries Ltd Vs. Gammon India Ltd and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-13-2014
ORDER SHEET GA No.159 of 2014 With CS No.11 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE CTS INDUSTRIES LTD Versus GAMMON INDIA LTD & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 13th August, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Jishnu Saha, Sr.Adv.Mr.Ashish Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Rupak Ghosh, Adv.Ms.Surabhi Banerjee, Adv.Ms.Sulagna Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Rohit Mukherji, Adv.The Court : Mr.Jishnu Saha, learned senior advocate appearing on defendant no.2 furnished by behalf the of allowed the invocation plaintiff namely, defendant no.2, plaintiff, in of favour submits a of bank the that the guarantee beneficiary, although the said bank guarantee has expired and there was no consent given by the plaintiff for renewal of the said guarantee. The original bank guarantee was returned to the plaintiff. It is further submitted that Gammon is indebted to the plaintiff for huge sum and the Gammon could not have invoked the said bank guarantee. plaintiff apprehends that in...
Murari Mohan Kejriwal Vs. Ramesh Kumar Kejriwal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-13-2014
CS No.222 of 2009 GA No.565 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Murari Mohan Kejriwal Versus Ramesh Kumar Kejriwal & ORS.Before: The Hon'ble Justice I.P.MUKERJ.Date: 13h August 2014 Appearance: Mr.Moloy Ghosh, Advocate Mr.Devojyoti Bhattacharya, Advocate Mr.Surajit Sen, Advocate Ms.Nairita Datta Choudhury, Advocate for the plaintiff Mr.Subhasis Sengupta, Advocate Mr.S.R. Karnani, Adovcate Mr.Sounik Kundu, Advocate for defendant Nos.1 & 2 Mr.Kausik Banerjee, Advocate for proforma defendant The Court: This is an amendment application. It is taken out by the plaintiff. Having gone through the proposed amendments, I am of the view that these proposed amendments provide the necessary details to the existing pleadings. They highlight the subject matter of the dispute without changing it. The decree originally claimed was interest or damages. By the proposed amendments, an additional claim has been included asking for inquiry into the damages suffered. I...
- ‹ Prev
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- Next ›
- Last »