Kolkata Court February 2015 Judgments
Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata Vs. M/S. S.R. Batliboi and Associa ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-24-2015
ORDER SHEET ITA190OF2009IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA Versus M/S.S.R.BATLIBOI & ASSOCIATES BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 24th February, 2015. For Appellant/Petitioner : Mrs.Smita Das De,Advocate For Respondent/assessee : Mr.R.N.Bajoria,Sr.Advocate Mr.A.Gupta,Advocate Mr.M.Ghorawat,Advocate The Court : The subject matter of challenge in this appeal, at the instance of revenue, is a judgement and order dated 13th February, 2009 by which the learned Tribunal agreeing with the CIT (Appeal) held that omission to file certified copy of the instrument of change in the partnership deed along with the return was not fatal and therefore, did not attract the consequences laid down in Section 185 of the Income Tax Act. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Tribunal, the revenue has come up in appeal. The following question of law was framed at the time of ...
Tag this Judgment!Kumkum Mittal and Ors. Vs. Robin Paul and Ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-23-2015
E.O.S. 1 of 1985 C.S. No.240 of 1990 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Kumkum Mittal & Ors. Vs. Robin Paul & Ors. For the Plaintiff s : Mr. Anirban Ray, Advocate Mr. S. Mukherjee, Advocate Mr. S. Kundu, Advocate For the Defendants : Mr. Aniruddha Mitra, Advocate For the Defendant No.2 : Mr. Moloy Ghose, Sr. Advocate Mr. D. Sen, Advocate Mr. M.K. Seal, Advocate Hearing concluded on : November 24, 2014 Judgment on : February 23, 2015 DEBANGSU BASAK, J.The suit is for declaration and perpetual injunction. The plaintiffs claim that the original plaintiff No.1 was in absolute control and management of two companies, namely, the New Red Bank Tea Estate Company Private Limited and Surendranagar Tea Estate Private Limited. The plaintiffs claim that the first defendant took over the control and management of the two companies wrongfully and illegally from the original plaintiff No.1. The defendant nos. 6 and 7 had enjoyed credit facilities from the defendant No....
Tag this Judgment!Punjab and Sind Bank and Ors. Vs. Sri Jogeswar Mukherjee.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-23-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE A.P.O. No.101 of 2009 WITH W.P. No.1880 of 2001 Punjab & Sind Bank & ors. Versus Sri Jogeswar Mukherjee. BEFORE: The Honble CHIEF JUSTICE DR. MANJULA CHELLUR The Honble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Heard on:28. 10.2014, 30.10.2014, 31.10.2014, 07.11.2014 & 18.11.2014 Delivered on: February 23, 2015. For the Appellants:- Mr. J.Kar, Mr. S. Majumdar. For the Respondent:- Mr. Sadhan Roy Chowdhury. Dr. Manjula Chellur, Chief Justice : In brief the facts of the present appeal are narrated as under:The respondent was Manager-in-Charge of Branch Office of Bhagalpur and Kharagpur of the appellant bank. While performing his official duties, according to appellant, he committed misconduct under the Punjab and Sind Bank Officers Employees (Conduct) Regulations of 1981 particularly under Regulation 3(1) and 3(2) read with Regulation 24 of the Regulations. The gist of the charges in the departmental enquiry initiated against the res...
Tag this Judgment!Pabitra Kumar Basu and Anr. Vs. The Calcutta Municipal Corporation
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-23-2015
C.S.No.246 of 1999 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Original Side Pabitra Kumar Basu & Anr. versus The Calcutta Municipal Corporation For the Plaintiffs : Mr.Soumak Mitra, Advocate Mr.Debasish Purkait, Advocate MRS.Rita Sinha, Advocate For the Defendant : Mr.Gopal Chandra Das, Advocate Hearing concluded on : February 19, 2015 Judgment on : February 23, 2015 DEBANGSU BASAK, J. The plaintiffs seek recovery of price of goods sold and delivered and refund of security deposits as well as interest on these two heads of claims from the defendant. The plaintiffs claim to have responded to a tender floated by the defendant. The plaintiffs claim to have sold and delivered goods to defendant and to have put in security deposit with the defendant. The plaintiffs claim that they have raised seven bills on the defendant for an aggregate sum Rs.1,40,96,000/-. In spite of demands the defendant did not pay the same. The plaintiffs refer to a suit being C.S.No.259 of 19...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Pawan Proproties Vs. Prohlad Rai Dhanania @ Agarwal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-23-2015
In The High Court At Calcutta Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Original Side APOT475of 2014 GA2723of 2014 CS120of 2011 M/S.Pawan Proproties -vs.Prohlad Rai Dhanania @ Agarwal Before: The Honble The Chief Justice Manjula Chellur And The Honble Justice Arijit Banerjee For the appellants : Mr.Partha Sarathi Sengupta, Adv.Mr.Sabyasachi Choudhury, Adv.Mr.Srenik Singhvi, Adv.Mr.Sananda Sanyal, Adv.For the respondents : Mr.Malay Ghosh, Adv.Ms.Suparna Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Atish Ghosh, Adv.Heard On 14/11/2014 : 11/11/2014, Judgment On : 23/02/2015 12/11/2014, 13/11/2014, Arijit Banerjee, J.: (1) This is an appeal from a judgment and order dated 5th August, 2014 passed by the Ld. FiRs.Court dismissing GA No.1197 of 2014 which was an application filed by the defendant No.10 in the suit for rejection of the plaint on the ground that the plaint does not disclose any cause of action against the defendant No.10 and also that the suit is barred by the laws of limitation against the defendant No.10. (2) The p...
Tag this Judgment!A.M.Industries Ltd. Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-23-2015
ORDER SHEET CS3851999 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE A.M.INDUSTRIES LTD.Versus STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 23rd February, 2015. Ms.Suparna Mukherjee, Advocate, for the plaintiff. Mr.Dhruba Ghosh, Advocate, for the defendant. The Court : The plaintiff claims money decree as well as decree of declaration and sale against the defendant. According to the plaintiff, it had given an immovable property on lease to the defendant.1998. The same was Such lease had expired by efflux of time on May 31, extended till December 31, 1998. According to the plaintiff, in terms of the agreement dated August 3, 1996, by which the property was let out to the defendant, with the expiry of the term of the lease, the defendant was to make over vacant possession thereof to the plaintiff. The defendant did not make over vacant possession of the immovable property to the defendant. In such circumstances, the plai...
Tag this Judgment!Mohanlal Rajgarhia Vs. State of West Bengal and Ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-23-2015
In The High Court At Calcutta Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Original Side APO107of 2014 GA1023of 2014 WP866of 2012 Mohanlal Rajgarhia -vs.State of West Bengal & ORS.Before Chellur The Honble The Chief Justice Manjula And The Honble Justice Arijit Banerjee For the appellant Adv.: Mr.Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, Sr.Mr.Kumar Gupta, Adv.Ms.Nibedita Pal, Adv.Mr.A.G.Mukherjee, Adv.For C.I.T : Mr.P.S.Basu, Adv.Mr.Satyajit Talukdar, Adv.For the State : Mr.Sadhan Roychowdhury, Adv.Mr.T.M.Siddique, Adv.Heard on : 09/12/14, 18/12/14, 19/12/14 and 22/12/14 Judgment On : 23/02/2015 Arijit Banerjee, J.: (1) This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 21st March, 2014 passed by the Ld. FiRs.Court, dismissing the appellants writ petition being WP No.866 of 2012. Contention of the appellant:(2) The appellant owned a parcel of land, comprised in premises No.211C and 211E Bagmari Road, Calcutta, measuring an area of about 37 Cottahs 4 Chhitacks 17 sq. ft. (3) A declaration dated 4th August, 1954...
Tag this Judgment!Ashoke Industries Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Kajal Sengupta and Ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-23-2015
CS No.73 of 1998 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ASHOKE INDUSTRIES LTD.& ORS.Versus KAJAL SENGUPTA & ORS.Appearance Mr.Dhruba Ghosh, Adv.Ms.Ahana Sikdar, Adv.Mr.Chayan Gupta, Adv.Mr.N.Sengupta, Adv.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 23rd February, 2015. The Court : In the second call none appears for the plaintiff when the suit is taken up for hearing. The cross-examination of the fiRs.witness of the defendant is closed. The defendant has another witness. The defendant is permitted to produce the second witness. The examination-in-chief of the second witness of the defendant nos.1,2 and 3 is closed. None appears for the plaintiff to cross-examine such witness. Learned Counsel for the defendant nos.1, 2 and 3 is called upon to commence his submission. In couRs.of the submissions of the learned Counsel for the defendant nos.1 to 3, the learned Advocate for the plaintiffs appears and seeks adjournment of hearing without speci...
Tag this Judgment!Lmj International Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. and Ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-20-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Present : The Honble Justice Arijit Banerjee 20.02.2015 GA2098of 2014 CS233of 2014 LMJ International LTD.& ORS.versus Kotak Mahindra Bank LTD.& ORS.Mr.S.N.Mitra, Senior Advocate with Mr.Shyamal Sarkar, Senior Advocate Mr.Navneet Maur, Advocate Mr.Sananda Mukhopadhyay, Advocate Mr.D.N.Sharma, Advocate Mr.S.Sarkar, Advocate for the petitioers Mr.Aniruddha Roy, Advocate with Mr.S.Nigam, Advocate Mr.S.Sengupta, Advocate for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 Mr.A.K.Gandhi, Advocate for the defendant no.1 bank The Court :- The petitioner no.3 is the father of the petitioner Nos.4, 5 and 6 and the respondent no.3. The Jain family carries on business through various limited companies. The petitioner Nos.1 and 2 and the respondent no.2 are three such limited companies. It appears that in couRs.of business the respondent no.1 advanced business loans to the aforesaid three limited companies and documents of title to properties held in th...
Tag this Judgment!Jaydeep Majumdar Vs. West Bengal Industrial Development Corporation Li ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-19-2015
Form No.J.(2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Original Side Present : The Honble Justice Ashim Kumar Banerjee And The Honble Justice Samapti chatterjee A.P.O.No.113 of 2014 A.P.O.No.116 of 2014 G.A83of 2015 W.P.794 of 2010 Jaydeep Majumdar versus West Bengal Industrial Development Corporation Limited and Others AND A.P.O.No.114 of 2014 A.P.O.No.115 of 2014 G.A.No.82 of 2015 W.P.No.143 of 2013 Apurba Banerjee versus West Bengal Industrial Development Corporation Limited and Others AND W.P.2141 (w) OF2010Jaydeep Majumdar & ORS.versus The Managing Director, West Bengal Industrial Development Corporation Limited and Others For the Appellants : For the Respondents 1 and 2: For Satyendra Nath Routh Mr.Kallol Bose, Advocate Mr.Suman Banerjee, Advocate Mr.Lakshmi Kumar Gupta, Senior Advocate Additional Advocate General Mr.D.K.Samanta, Advocate Mr.Mohit Gupta, Advocate Mr.Anuran Samanta, Advocate : Mr.Subir Sanyal, Advocate For the State in APO116of 2014: Mr.Manoj Mal...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »