Kolkata Court September 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.
Shenaaz Hafiz and ors. Vs. the Calcutta Municipal Corporation and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2014
WP No.929 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SHENAAZ HAFIZ & ORS.Versus THE CALCUTTA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 26th September, 2014. Appearance: Mr.D.Mantos, Advocate Ms.Lapita Banerjee, Advocate for the petitioners Mr.Chittaranjan Ghosh, Advocate for State of West Bengal Mr.Sujoy Mondal, Advocate Ms.Rumi Sen, Advocate for Kolkata Municipal Corporation The Court: One Sk. Abdul Hanif was a stall-holder in New Market which is under the ownership and management of Kolkata Municipal Corporation. The writ petitioner No.1 caused the owner to sublet the stall to the writ petitioners husband. The writ petitioner No.1 was carrying on business from this place. Both the stall-holder, the writ petitioner No.1 and her husband were evicted from the stall on the ground of subletting without its permission. The stall is locked. Mr.Mantos, learned Advocate for the petitioneRs.produces a chart of the Kolkat...
Frost International Limited Vs. Pracific International Lines (India) P ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2014
GA No.3156 of 2014 CS No.361 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE FROST INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Versus PRACIFIC INTERNATIONAL LINES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. Appearance: Mr.Ranjan Bachawat, Sr.Adv.Mr.Mainak Bose, Adv.Mr.Ratnanko Banerjee, Sr.Adv.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 26th September, 2014. The Court : The petitioner imported 259 MTs of PVC Resin Grade LS100 under four several bills of lading. On arrival of the consignment at the Kolkata Sea Port the petitioner appointed the respondent No.2 as its clearing and handing over agent to clear the cargo upon discharge. The petitioner makes payment of charges to respondent no.2 and instructs the respondent no.2 to liaison with the customs and the respondent no.1 for delivery of the cargo. All the four original bills of lading were handed over by the petitioner to the respondent no.2. On August 2, 2014 the petitioner was informed by the respondent no.2 that he, mis-pl...
Bhaskar Basu Vs. the Kolkata Municipal Corporation and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2014
ORDER SHEET WP NO.927 OF2014IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE BHASKAR BASU Versus THE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 26th September, 2014. Mr.S.Chakrabortyfor petitioner. Mr.L.C.Behani, senior advocate, Ms.S.Mukherjeefor KMC. Mr.A.Das, Mr.S.Banerjeefor respondent Nos.5&6. The Court : The writ petitioner wants premises no.121/1C, Bidhan Sarani, Kolkata-700 004 to be declared as a heritage building. It is not so declared upto date. Mr.Das appearing for the owner of this building submits that he has entered into a development agreement with a developer. The building plan has been sanctioned. Work is to begin soon. The prima facie case in favour of the petitioner is that the buildings 121/1A and 121/1B, Bidhan Sarani, Kolkata-700 004 have been declared as heritage building. Hence, 121/1C, Bidhan Sarani, Kolkata-700 004 should also be declared as a heritage building. This Court is not minded to ...
Jayanta Chatterji Vs. Kolkata Municipal Corporation and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side Present: The Honble Justice Soumitra Pal. W.P.No.133 of 2014 Jayanta Chatterji Versus Kolkata Municipal Corporation & ORS.With W.P.No.134 of 2014 Nareshyam Properties PVT.LTD.& Anr. Versus Kolkata Municipal Corporation & ORS.For the Petitioners : Mr.Kishore Dutta, Senior Advocate, Mr.Sabyasachi Sen, Advocate. Mr.S.Sen, Advocate. For KMC : Mr.Aloke Kumar Ghosh, Advocate, Mr.G.C.Das, Advocate. Judgment on: : 26th September, 2014 Soumitra Pal, J.:Since issues involved in the writ petitions, being W.P.133 of 2014 and W.P134of 2014, are identical, with the consent of the learned advocates for the parties the matters were heard analogously. However, for the sake of clarity and better understanding the facts in W.P.134 of 2014 are dealt with in this judgment. In the writ petition, being W.P.134 of 2014, affirmed on 10th February, 2014, the petitioner no.1 a private limited company and owner of a space on the fiRs.flo...
Ansun Systems Consulting Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Customs [Po ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2014
ORDER SHEET T NO.299 OF2014WP No.OF2014IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ANSUN SYSTEMS CONSULTING PVT.LTD.Versus THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS [PORT].& ORS. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 26th September, 2014. Mr.Bhaskar Sen, senior advocate, Mr.V.Misrafor petitioner. Mr.R.K.Bharadwaj, Mr.K.K.Maityfor respondents. The Court : It appears from the letter of the Deputy Commissioner of Customs appraising group-4 dated 12th September, 2014 that initially the goods in question were assessed to duty considering them under Customs Tariff Heading 7204. Thereafter, the department had a change of mind. Relying on an instruction dated 9th July, 2014 of the Central Board of Excise and Customs that import of second hand/defective/old strip coils etc.were not permitted, the Customs department has held up clearance of the goods. According to the Customs the goods are prohibited items and cannot be imported and liable to confiscation. According to...
Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Wbii
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2014
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE ITA No.95 of 2012 DOOM DOOMA TEA Co.LTD.(NOW MERGED WITH MCLEOD RUSSELL India LTD Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, WB-II BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 26th September, 2014. Mr.Siddhartha Das, Adv.Mr.R.N.Banerjee, Adv.Ms.Soma Chatterjee, Adv.The Court : This Income Tax Appeal was admitted on the following questions : 1. Whether the Tribunal below committed substantial error of law in upholding the computation of the value of fringe benefit in the case of assessee engaged in the business of growing, manufacturing and sale of tea without having regard to the relevant provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 read with Rule 8 of the Income-tax Rules 1962.2. Whether the Tribunal below committed substantial error of law in holding that there was no similarity between the provisions of Section 115WA vis--vis section 115-0 of the Act.3. Whether the Tribun...
Panghat Sarees Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Panghat and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2014
GA No.3120 of 2014 CS No.358 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE PANGHAT SAREES PVT.LTD.-VersusPANGHAT & ORS.Appearance: Mr.Ranjan Bachawat, Sr.Adv.Mr.Debnath Ghosh, Adv...for the plaintiff. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 26th September, 2014. The Court : Let the affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept with the records. In spite of service of this application, none has appeared to oppose this application. The petitioner is claiming to be the sole proprietor of Panghat. It is stated that the petitioner is the owner of the trademark Panghat Sarees and has been continuing the same since 1999. It was initially in the name of Nirmal Saraf and thereafter the private limited company was formed in 2003. It is stated that the petitioner is the assignee of the trademark Panghat from Nirmal Saraf, who is the promoterdirector of the company. On 30th January, 2014, on an application filed by the petitioner, the trademark ...
Ratna Mukherjee and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE Present: The Honble Justice Sambuddha Chakrabarti G.A.No.3202 of 2013 W.P.No.1010 of 2013 Ratna Mukherjee & ORS.Versus State of West Bengal & ORS.For the petitioner : Mr.Sakti Nath Mukherjee, Senior Advocate Mr.L.C.Bihani, Senior Advocate Mr.Anath Bandhu Dutta. Advocate For the respondents : Mr.Ayan Banerjee. Advocate Heard on : 25.03.2014, 18.03.2014, 01.04.2014, 08.04.2014, 17.06.2014 and 08.07.2014 Judgement on : 26.09.2014 The Court : By this petition the petitioners have, inter alia, prayed for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to withdraw and cancel the notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act, for short) and the declaration under Section 6 of the Act which have been annexed to the writ petition as Annexures P-3 and P-6 respectively as well as a writ in the nature of madamus commanding the respondents to de-requisition the concerned premises...
M/S. Sundaram Finance Ltd Vs. Tapas Kundu and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2014
ORDER SHEET GA No.2702 of 2012 With EC No.89 of 2010 GA No.2068 of 2011 GA No.66 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.SUNDARAM FINANCE LTD Versus TAPAS KUNDU & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 26th September, 2014. Appearance: Mr.R.Sing, Adv.Mr.Chayan Gupta, Adv.The Court : The petitioner is the award holder. In enforcement of the award the petitioner seeks to seize the vehicle and sell the vehicle in question. During the pendency of the proceeding it transpired that the judgment debtors are absconding. The Receiver took inspection of the vehicle and thereafter it appears that the vehicle has been stolen and an FIR has been lodged with the local Police Station. Final report has also been submitted. Under the facts and circumstances, notice was served upon the Insurance Company in order to find out that in such case under the policy and insurance what amount would be payable to the owner. 2 The Insurance Company a...
Rabindra Kumar Mehra Vs. Tara Chand Mehra and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Sep-26-2014
ORDER SHEET GA30862014 APOT5452014 CS902012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE RABINDRA KUMAR MEHRA Versus TARA CHAND MEHRA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.MANJULA CHELLUR The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE Date : 26th September, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, ld. Sr.Advocate, Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury, Advocate Mr.Sarvapriya Mukherjee, Advocate Mr.Rajesh Upadhyay, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.Abhijit Roy, Advocate Mr.Sobhan Kumar Pathak, Advocate Ms.Shalu Gupta, Advocate for the respondent no.3. Mr.Lal Ratan Mondal, Advocate appears For the respondent No.1. Mr.Aditya Kanodia, Advocate for the respondent no.2. The Court :- Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant as well as the respondents. An application came to be filed by the plaintiff seeking recall of the order dated 7.7.2014 on the ground that the plaintiff had never consented for implementation of the settlement between the parties but the learned Advocate who was appearing withou...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »