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.
Faizul Islam Vs. Legal Remembrancer,
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-01-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.710 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE FAIZUL ISLAM Versus LEGAL REMEMBRANCER, GOVERNMENT OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 1st August, 2014 Ms.Amrita Sinha , Advocate ..for the petitioner Mr.Saikat Chatterjee, Advocate ..for the respondents The petitioner was a panel advocate of the State of West Bengal since 1982 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 29 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. T...
Keshab Bhattacherjee Vs. Legal Remebrancer,
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-01-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.724 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE KESHAB BHATTACHERJEE Versus LEGAL REMEBRANCER, GOVERNMENT OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 1st August, 2014 Ms.Amrita Sinha , Advocate ..for the petitioner Ms.Rita Patra, Advocate ..for the respondents On joint prayer of the learned advocates of both the parties, the writ petition is treated as on days list. The petitioner was a panel advocate of the State of West Bengal since 1987 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 24 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 fe...
Satyabrata Mazumder Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-01-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.694 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SATYABRATA MAZUMDER Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 1st August, 2014 Ms.Rina Banerjee , Advocate ..for the petitioner Ms.Tapati Samanta, Advocate ..for the respondents The petitioner was a panel advocate of the State of West Bengal since 1989 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 22 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 necessaril...
Subir Ganguly Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-01-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.695 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SUBIR GANGULY Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 1st August, 2014 Ms.Rina Banerjee , Advocate ..for the petitioner Ms.Tapati Samanta, Advocate ..for the respondents The petitioner was a panel advocate of the State of West Bengal since 1989 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 22 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 necessarily requ...
Lina Majumder Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-01-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.687 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE LINA MAJUMDER Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 1st August, 2014 Ms.Rina Banerjee , Advocate ..for the petitioner Mr.Subir Pal, Advocate ..for the respondents The petitioner was a panel advocate of the State of West Bengal since 1983 till May, 2011. She is aggrieved because the bills raised by her 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 28 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 she is not entitled to the fees charged by her and to release such quantum of payment to the petitioner, as are found to be admissible. That would necessarily require...
Khondakar Nuran Nabi Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-01-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.679 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE KHONDAKAR NURAN NABI Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 1st August, 2014 Ms.Rina Banerjee , Advocate ..for the petitioner Ms.Tapati Samanta, 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 himr 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 necessar...
Arati Ghosh Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-01-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.677 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ARATI GHOSH Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 1st August, 2014 Ms.Rina Banerjee , Advocate ..for the petitioner Ms.Aparna Ghosh, Advocate ..for the respondents The petitioner was a panel advocate of the State of West Bengal since 1989 till May, 2011. She is aggrieved because the bills raised by her 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 22 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 she is not entitled to the fees charged by her and to release such quantum of payment to the petitioner, as are found to be admissible. That would necessarily requir...
Pinaki Bhattacharyya Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-01-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.689 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE PINAKI BHATTACHARYYA Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 1st August, 2014 Ms.Rina Banerjee , Advocate ..for the petitioner Mr.Subir Pal, Advocate ..for the respondents The petitioner was a panel advocate of the State of West Bengal since 2009 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 2 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 necessarily req...
Biswarupa Mitra Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-01-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.690 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE BISWARUPA MITRA Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA Date: 1st August, 2014 Ms.Rina Banerjee , Advocate ..for the petitioner Mr.Subir Pal, Advocate ..for the respondents The petitioner was a panel advocate of the State of West Bengal since 1997 till May, 2011. She is aggrieved because the bills raised by her 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 she is not entitled to the fees charged by her and to release such quantum of payment to the petitioner, as are found to be admissible. That would necessarily requir...
Sanjay Shree Corporation and ors. Vs. Chief Postmaster General and ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-01-2014
1 ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE W.P. 562 of 2014 Sanjay Shree Corporation & ors. Versus Chief Postmaster General & ors. Before : The Honble Justice Dipankar Datta Date : August 1, 2014 Mr. S. K. Mal, Advocate Mr. R. L. Mitra, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Amaresh Bag, Advocate for U.O.I. Mr. Abhijit Chatterjee, Sr. Advocate as Amicus Curiae 1. Feeling aggrieved by arbitrary fixation of monthly rent for the portion of premises No.11B, Kalakar Street, Kolkata 700007 under occupation of the Post and Telegraph Department, Government of India, the petitioning company along with others had the occasion to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court by filing a writ petition, (numbered as W.P. No.240 of 2010). It was disposed of on July 30, 2010 by me. The operative part of the order reads as follows: In the result, the impugned decision as communicated by letter dated 6.8.2008 (Annexure P8) stands set aside. The official respon...
- ‹ Prev
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 39
- Next ›
- Last »