Kolkata Court March 2017 Judgments
Prokrity Nath Mukhopadhyay Vs. Saroj Banerjee
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-30-2017
T.S.No.3 of 2002 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction Original Side Prokrity Nath Mukhopadhyay versus Saroj Banerjee For the Plaintiff : Mr.Mr.Mr.Mr.Mr.Mr.Mr.Shyama Prasad Sarkar, Sr.Advocate Arindam Mukherjee, Advocate Debnath Ghosh, Advocate Utpal Majumdar, Advocate Abhishek Banerjee, Advocate Aritra Basu, Advocate Sachchida Nand Pandey, Advocate Hearing concluded on : March 21, 2017 Judgment on : March 30, 2017 DEBANGSU BASAK, J. A testamentary suit is taken up for final hearing. By an Order dated March 14, 2016 the proceedings for probate was converted into one for grant of Letters of Administration. An amendment application was allowed in the suit. The plaintiff had applied for taking evidence on commission. Such application was allowed. The plaintiff had examined one witness in commission. Such witness was cross-examined. The plaintiff had made an application being G.A.No.2868 of 2016 seeking re-examination of its witness. The pleadings in the app...
Tag this Judgment!Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs. Amiya Steel Private Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-30-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Original Side A.P.No.555 of 2010 Steel Authority of India LTD.versus Amiya Steel Private Limited For the petitioners:- Mr.Pradip Kumar Ghosh..Sr.Adv.Mr.Abhijit Gangopadhyay Mr.Supriya Dubey Mr.Gopal Chatterjee Advocates For the Respondents:- Mr.S.N.Mitra...Sr.Adv.Mr.D.N.Sharna Mr.Shailendra Jain Mr.Tirthankar Dey Advocates Judgement On: - 30th March, 2017 I.P.MUKERJI, J. This is an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to set aside an award dated 30th September, 2008 passed by a departmental arbitrator of Steel Authority of India Limited, Sr.B.M.K.Singh. It was heard on a preliminary objection that it was barred by the laws of limitation. Section 34 (3) of the said Act provides that an application to set aside the award may be made by a party not after three months of the date of receipt of the award. The court, before which such an application is made, has the power to condone delay...
Tag this Judgment!M/S.Shivlaxmi Exports Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax,w.B.Vi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-30-2017
JUDGMENT ITA NO.134 OF2001IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION(INCOME-TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.SHIVLAXMI EXPORTS LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,W.B.-VI BEFORE: The Honble JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date :30. h March, 2017. MR.G.R.SHARMA,ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT MR.PRABIR BHOWMICK, MR.P.DUDHERIA, MR.YOGESH VATS, ADVOCATES FOR RESPONDENT The Court : After hearing the appellant-assessee, we admit the appeal on the following two questions as suggested by the assessee.1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case Tribunal was right in confirming the addition of interest, though waived by the assessee on account of the debtors inability to pay the interest for years simply on the score that the assessee follows the mercantile method of accounting.2. Whether the Tribunals order is replete with incongruities and vitiated for being founded on a wrong premise that there was no resolution passed by the Board of Directors for the w...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Nemai Chand Dutt Vs. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-29-2017
ORDER SHEET GA692of 2017 With WP No.10 of 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SRI NEMAI CHAND DUTT Versus THE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date :29. h March, 2017. Appearance: Ms. Piyali Sengupta, Adv. Mr. Soumyajit Misra, Adv. Mr. Balarko Sen, Adv. Mr. Gopal Chandra Das, Adv. The Court : This is an application for restoration of the writ petition September, 2016. which was dismissed for default on 26th After perusing the averments made therein and the submissions advanced on behalf of the respective parties, this Court finds that the petitioner was prevented by sufficient cause in not appearing on the said date when the matter was dismissed for default. The application is, thus, allowed. petition is restored to its original file and number. The writ After the restoration of the writ petition, the same is taken up for final disposal. The challenge is made to a notice of demand dated 1st Octo...
Tag this Judgment!Jupiter International Ltd. and Anr. Vs. The Kolkata Municipal Corporat ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-28-2017
ORDER SHEET WP832of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE JUPITER INTERNATIONAL LTD.& ANR. Versus THE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date : 28th March, 2017. Appearance: Ms.Sutapa Sanyal Adv.Mr.Debrup Bhattacharya, Adv.Mr.P.K.Tulsyan, Adv.Mr.Biswajit Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Debangshu Mondal, Adv.The Court : The Writ Court should not ordinarily entertain the petition when a challenge is made to a decision if there is alternative efficacious remedy but is maintainable when the process by contrary to law. which such decision has been arrived is found Certainly, this Court is not entering into the nitty gritty of the annual valuation pertaining to property tax but the manner in which the same has been done is the question to be decided in the instant writ petition. Admittedly, the property was the two-storied building and the petitioners purchased the same by the dint of two separate deeds. the Some portio...
Tag this Judgment!Ambition Reality Projects Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Prabir Kumar Chatterj ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-28-2017
ORDER SHEET EC No.404 of 2014 GA No.2715 of 2016 GA No.3558 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE AMBITION REALITY PROJECTS PVT.LTD.AND ANR. Versus PRABIR KUMAR CHATTERJEE AND ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 28th March, 2017. Appearance: Mr.Ahin Chowdhury, Sr.Adv.Mr.Subhasis Sarkar, Adv.Mr.S.K.Samanta, Adv.for the decree-holdeRs.Mr.Debnath Ghosh, Adv.Mr.Sarosij Dasgupta, Adv.Mr.Avijit Dey, Adv.for the judgment-debtORS.The Court : The award-holders have filed an application for taking exception to the report filed by the Special Officer in demarcating the property on the basis of the report of the Surveyor dated 18th December, 2015. Mr.Ahin Chowdhury, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the awardholders submits that the Special Officer as well as the Surveyor has completely misdirected its mind in taking consideration that the joint venture agreement is in respect of 24 cottahs of land comprising Dag Nos.455,...
Tag this Judgment!Saraf Agencies Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Federal Agencies for State Prope ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-24-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Original Side A.P.No.1038 of 2016 Saraf Agencies PVT.LTD.& Anr. versus Federal Agencies For State Property Management & Anr. For the petitioners:- Mr.Jishnu Saha..Sr.Adv Mr.Ishan Saha Ms.Riti Basu Advocates For the Respondents:- Mr.Ratnanko Banerjee, Sr.Adv.MRS.Ritu Valla Mr.M.Manukrishnan Ms.Prapa Ganguly Advocates Judgement On: - 24th March, 2017 I.P.MUKERJI, J. In this application, under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, an interim arbitral award made on 14th October, 2016 is challenged. It was made and published by a panel of three very distinguished Judges of our country, Justice S.C.Agrawal, Justice D.P.Wadhwa and Justice S.B.Sinha. The claimants /petitioners were directed to pay a sum of Rs.135,16,92,947.73 to the account of TPPL within one month from the date of the award, failing which they would have to pay interest @ 24% p.a.from the date of the interim award till the date of payment. ...
Tag this Judgment!Shaheen Begum Vs. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-24-2017
ORDER SHEET WP1012017 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SHAHEEN BEGUM Versus THE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date : 24th March, 2017. Appearance: Mr.Yamin Ali, Adv.Mr.Lalratan Mondal, Adv.Ms.Saira Banu, Adv.for the petitioner. Mr.Hiranmoy Bhattacharya, Adv.Mr.Sanjay Mukherjee, Adv.for the respondent no.8. Mr.Gurudas Mitra, Adv.Mr.Subhendu Banerjee, Adv.Mr.Sayeda Fouzana Hossain,Adv.for the KMC. Ms.Sipra Majumder, Adv.Mr.Manoj Malhotra, Adv.Ms.Susmita Biswas Chowdhury, Adv.Mr.Mainak Ganguly, Adv for the State. The Court : The unscrupulous promoters and developers used their economic and other resources in erecting the building within the city of Kolkata and after selling the part or the whole suddenly disappeared from the scene keeping those bona fide purchasers or the occupants to remain in lurch in knocking the doors of the different corridors to redress their grievances and to protect their p...
Tag this Judgment!Success Tours and Travels Private Limited and Anr, Vs. Income Tax offi ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-2017
Form No.J(2) GA NO.3855 OF2015WITH ITAT NO.178 OF2015IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION(INCOME-TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE SUCCESS TOURS AND TRAVELS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANR, Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9(4) KOLKATA & ORS. BEFORE: The Honble JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date :23. d March, 2017. MR.SUBASH AGARWAL, MR.BRIJESH KR.SINGH, MR.R.BHARADAJ, ADVOCATES FOR APPELLANTS MR.S.B.SARAF, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS Aniruddha Bose. J.:1. The assessee is an incorporated company and this appeal relates to its assessment in the year 2008-09. It has been submitted on behalf of the assessee before us that the Assessment Year 2008-2009 was its first year of assessment. For the relevant previous year, according to the Assessee, it had no income. In that year, share capital of Rs.24,68,000/- was infused in the assessee company at a premium of Rs.5,68,32,000/-, the latter sum being reflected in the balance sheet under the head reserves and surplus.. A copy of th...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Gammon India Limited. Vs. Damodar Valley Corporation
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-23-2017
AP No.1089 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.GAMMON INDIA LIMITED. -VersusDAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 23rd March, 2017. Appearance: Mr.Jishnu Saha Sr.Adv.Mr.Isham Saha, Adv.Mr.Emon Bhattacharyya, Adv.Mr.Dibakar Bhattacharhyya, Adv.Mr.Bipin Prabhat, Adv...for the petitioner. Mr.Joydeep Kar, Sr.Adv.Mr.Subir Pal, Adv...for the respondent. The Court: This is an application for appointment of an Arbitrator. The existence of the arbitration clause or the arbitration agreement is not in dispute. The respondent refused to refer the dispute to arbitration on the ground that no amount is due and payable to the respondent under the works contract in view of no demand certificate duly issued by the General Manager of the petitioner. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has issued no demand certificate on 16th March, 2016 following which on 22nd March, 2016 the security deposit bank guarantee...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »