Kolkata Court February 2017 Judgments
Union of India and Ors. Vs. M/S. Venus Engineering Concern Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-28-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE BEFORE: THE HONBLE JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN AP No.274 of 2005 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. -VersusM/S. VENUS ENGINEERING CONCERN PVT. LTD. For the Petitioner : Mr. Partha Sarathi Bose, Sr. Adv. Ms. Aparna Banerjee, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. Jayanta Kumar Mitra, Sr. Adv. Ms. Srinanda Bose, Adv., Mr. Arijt Basu, Adv. Heard On :10. 11.2016, 30.11.2016, 05.01.2017, 19.01.2017, 25.01.2017, 08.02.2017, 15.02.2017, 17.02.2017, 24.02.2017. Judgment On :28. h February, 2017 Soumen Sen, J.:- This is an application for setting aside of an award at the instance of the Eastern Railway. The award is assailed principally on three grounds. The first ground is the existence of the prior award. The second ground is of legal misconduct since the arbitrator had no authority to allow Claim No.6 by disregarding Clause 17(3) of General Conditions of Contract. The third ground is that the arbitrator has exceeded its authority in allowing ...
Tag this Judgment!Poddar Projects Ltd and Anr. Vs. Economic Transport Organisation Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-28-2017
ORDER GA No.2883 of 2013 GA No.2905 of 2013 CS No.142 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction PODDAR PROJECTS LTD AND ANR. Versus ECONOMIC TRANSPORT ORGANISATION LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 28th February 2017. Appearance: Mr.Samit Talukdar, Senior Advocate. Mr.Bidyut Dutt, Advocate Ms.V.Bhatia, Advocate Mr.Debnath Ghose, Advocate ...for the plaintiffs. Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Senior Advocate Mr.Chayan Gupta, Advocate ...for the defendant. GA No.2883 of 2013 is an application under Chapter 13A of the Original Side Rules seeking a summary defendant upon expiry of the notice period. eviction of the The plaintiffs are the joint owners of the suit premises, namely 18, Rabindra Sarani, Kolkata 700001. By a scheme sanctioned by this court under Sections 391(2).392 and 394 of the Companies Act, the ownership of the area demised to the defendant was changed in the following manner:(i) The entire area ad measuring 1120 sft. of Poddar Udyog Lim...
Tag this Judgment!Central Coalfields Ltd. Vs. official Liquidator, High Court, Calcutta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-28-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction (Original Side) C.P.No.651 OF2013In the matter of: GASTEL INDIA LTD.(IN DISSOLUTION) AND In the matter of : CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD.-VSOFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR, HIGH COURT, CALCUTTA For Central Coalfields Ltd.:- Mr.Anirban Roy Mr.Soumabho Ghosh Mr.Pradyot Kumar Das .......Advocates For Voluntary Liquidator:- Mr.Debmalya Ghosal Mr.Tapan Sil .......Advocates For R.O.C.:- MRS.Indrani Chakraborty .........Advocate For Official Liquidator:- MRS.Smita Das Dey .....Advocate Judgement on:- 28th February, 2017 I.P.Mukerji,J. This is a very interesting matter. Central Coalfields Limited, has applied before this court under Section 559 of the Companies Act, 1956. It wants discharge of the order dated 15th December, 2006 passed by this court in a members voluntary winding up matter concerning Gastel India Ltd (the company).The order of this court noted that the Official Liquidator had sought dissolution of the company upon compliance with all formaliti...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Child in Need Institute (Need) Vs. Fourth Industrial Tribunal and ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-28-2017
ORDER SHEET G.A.No.3472 of 2016 G.A.No.15 of 2017 W.P.No.1043 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.CHILD IN NEED INSTITUTE (NEED) Versus FOURTH INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE Dr. SAMBUDDHA CHAKRABARTI Date : 28th February, 2017. For applicant : Mr.Saibal Mukherjee, Adv.For writ petitioner : Mr.Ranjay De with Mr.Basabjit Banerjee, Adversus For State : Ms.Tapati Samanta, Adv.Two applications under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, viz. G.A.No.3472 of 2016 and G.A.No.15 of 2017 arising out of W.P.No.1043 of 2016 have come up for consideration before me today. Re : G.A.No.3472 of 2016 Mr.Mukherjee, the learned Advocate for the applicants in both the applications, submits that Smt. Tagar Sardar alias Tagar Bala Sardar, the applicant in G.A.No.3472 of 2016, is not pressing the application. The application is thus dismissed as not pressed. Re : G.A.No.15 of 2017 It is the case of the applicant, Giasuddin Sard...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Onkar Parivahan Finance Private Limited and Anr. Vs. The Kolkata ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-24-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction (Original Side) W.P.No.742 of 2016 M/S.Onkar Parivahan Finance Private Limited & Anr. -VersusThe Kolkata Municipal Corporation & ORS.For the Petitioner:- Mr.Arindam Banerjee Mr.Sankarson Sarkar .......Advocates For the K.M.C.:- Mr.Alak Kumar Ghosh Mr.Debangshu Mondal .......Advocates Judgement on:- 24th February, 2017 I.P.Mukerji,J. In this judgment and order, the reference to the petitioner will mean reference to the petitioner company. On 15th September, 2005, the petitioner purchased a premises numbered as 19, Armenian Street Police Station; Barabazar, Kolkata 700 001. There is no dispute whatsoever that at the time of its sale, the building standing on the premises was in an absolutely dilapidated condition. On 17th July, 2006, the respondent corporation granted permission to demolish it. The petitioner submitted a building plan to the respondent corporation. It conceived of demolition of the existing building and erec...
Tag this Judgment!C.I.T. C I Kolkata Vs. M/S. Hooghly Mills Projects Ltd., Kolkata
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-24-2017
ORDER SHEET ITA338OF2003IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction(income tax) ORIGINAL SIDE C.I.T.- C- I KOLKATA Versus M/S.HOOGHLY MILLS PROJECTS LTD., KOLKATA BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 24th February, 2017. Mr.M.P.Agarwalla, Adv.appears for appellant. Mr.J.P.Khaitan, Sr.Adv.appears with Mr.S.Das, Adv., Mr.A.Chowdhury, Adv.and Mr.R.Poddar, Adv.for respondent. The Court : Though this appeal has been listed under the heading To Be Mentioned, today we are taking up the appeal for hearing on consent of the learned Advocates appearing for the appellant as well as the assessee. This appeal is directed against the order of the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No.1589/Kol/2001, dated December 30, 2002, dismissing the appeal of the Revenue mainly on two grounds. These grounds have also been suggested by the Revenue to be the substantial questions of law for the purpose of admission of this appeal, and subsequent hear...
Tag this Judgment!Ajoy Bangur and Ors. Vs. B. Mazumdar Samajpati and Sons Hotels Pvt. Lt ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-23-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE Present: The Honble Justice Shivakant Prasad CS263of 2005 Ajoy Bangur & ORS.Versus B. Mazumdar Samajpati & Sons Hotels PVT.LTD.For the plaintiff : Mr.Molay Kr. Ghosh, Sr.Adv.Mr.Aniruddha Mitra, Adv.Mr.Ashok Bose, Adv.Mr.Ajay Gaggar, Adv.Mr.S.Sarawaji, Adv.For the defendant : Mr.Swarendu Ghosh, Adv.Mr.S.P. Brahmachari, Adv.Heard on : 14.02.2017 C.A.V.on : 14.02.2017 Judgment on : 23.02.2017 This is a suit for a decree for Rs.12,00,000/-; enquiry into further loss and damage suffered by the plaintiffs, mandatory and perpetual injunction and other reliefs. Plaintiffs are the absolute owner of premises situate at 95A, Chittaranjan Avenue, Calcutta-700 073 (hereinafter referred to as the said premises).The said premises consists of a three storied building and comprises of an area of one bigha four cottahs of land. Prior to 1992 a portion of the said building comprising of 11 rooms on the fiRs.floor and 11 room...
Tag this Judgment!Prabhat Kumar Mahapatra Vs. The Calcutta Municipal Corporation and Ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-23-2017
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL SIDE GA No.573 of 2017 RVWO No.11 of 2017 PRABHAT KUMAR MAHAPATRA Versus THE CALCUTTA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.GA No.578 of 2017 RVWO No.11 of 2017 PRABHAT KUMAR MAHAPATRA Versus THE CALCUTTA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 23rd February, 2017. Appearance: Mr.Arik Banerjee, Adv.Mr.Avirup Mondal, Adv.Mr.Mohiuddin Sk., Adv.Mr.Rajib Mullick, Adv.Mr.Rakesh Sarekar, Adv.For the petitioner. Mr.Alok Kumar Ghosh, Adv.Mr.S.K.Debnath, Adv.For K.M.C.The Court :- The review petition along with the stay application in the review and the application for condonation of delay are all taken up together. GA No.573 of 2017 is an application for condonation of delay. The delay is of 70 days in making and filing the review application. The explanation given is that, the petitioner had preferred an appeal against the composite order dealing with an application the present writ petition and another writ petiti...
Tag this Judgment!Fairfest Media Limited Vs. Ite Group Plc and Ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-23-2017
ORDER SHEET GA No.754 of 2015 With CS No.329 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE FAIRFEST MEDIA LIMITED Versus ITE GROUP PLC & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 23rd February, 2017. Appearance: Mr.Debnath Ghosh, Adv.Mr.Kumarjit Banerjee, Adv.Mr.Sachin Shukla, Adv.Ms.Shreya Singh, Adv.Ms.Namrata De, Adv.Mr.Ratnanko Banerji, Mr.Aditya Kanodia, Ms.Urmila Chakraborty, Mr.Arindam Das, Adv.Adv.Adv.Adv.This is an application for revocation of leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent. The petitioner is the defendant no.1 in the suit. The application is filed after filing of the written statement. The grounds for revocation of leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent are existence of a non-exclusive jurisdictional clause and the balance of convenience. Prior to interlocutory this application, application praying, the inter plaintiff filed alia, injunction for an restraining the defendants from parting with confidential i...
Tag this Judgment!Banwarilal Agarwal and Ors. Vs. Pankaj Lohariwal and Ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Feb-23-2017
ORDER SHEET GA2884of 2015 With CS360of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE BANWARILAL AGARWAL & ORS.Versus PANKAJ LOHARIWAL & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 23rd February, 2017. Appearance: Mr.Mohit Gupta, Adv.Mr.Piyush Agarwal, Adv.The Court : The plaintiff anticipating that the dye is cast and bolt impending, filed this suit to stave off an imminent threat of initiating a proceeding under the SARFAESI Act. The plaintiff filed the suit in which the bank has been made party. A cobweb of cause of action has been spun to give an impression that the issues are inextricably connected and the presence of the bank would be necessary at the time of trial of this suit. When the suit was filed both the RDB and the SARFAESI Act have come into force and initiation of proceeding under the SARFAESI Act was imminent. The applicant has taken step under the SARFAESI Act. The notice under section 13(2) of the said Act dated 4th March,...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »