Kolkata Court August 2017 Judgments
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Vs. M/S. Star Battery Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-31-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Original Side A.P.No.1268 of 2013 Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited versus M/S.Star Battery Limited For the petitioners:- Mr.Debabrata Saha Roy Mr.Pingal Bhattacharjee Advocates For the Respondents:- Ms.Noelle Banerjee Mr.Dipak Dey Mr.Dipanjan Dey Advocates Judgement On: - 31st August, 2017 I.P.MUKERJI, J. This is an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The award dated 19th August, 2013 passed by a former judge of the subordinate judiciary is under challenge. A very interesting point is involved. On 21st October, 2008 the petitioner Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited concluded a contract with the respondent Star Battery Limited. The respondent was to supply 542 items of battery described as SMF VRLA600AH to the petitioner at or for the gross consideration including duties and taxes, of Rs.10,40,23,149.46. The delivery schedule was four months from the date of issuance of the purchase order an...
Tag this Judgment!Jaydeb Purakait Vs. M/S. Indusind Bank Ltd and Anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-31-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Civil Jurisdiction Original Side A.P.No.555 of 2017 Jaydeb Purakait versus M/S.Indusind Bank Ltd & Anr. For the petitioners:- Mr.B.B.Sarkar MRS.Iti Dutta Advocates For the Respondents:- Mr.Pranit Bag Mr.S.R.Ganguly Ms.P.Sett Advocates Judgement On: - 31st August, 2017 I.P.MUKERJI, J. This application is framed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. But during the couRs.of hearing of the application Mr.Sarkar learned counsel for the petitioner tried run an alternative case that the appointing authority or appointed arbitrator was not proceeding with the arbitration with due diligence or was refusing to act. Hence, he should be removed under Section 14 of the said Act. Now, the short background of the case is that on 31st October, 2012 the parties entered into a loan cum hypothecation agreement. A loan of Rs.20,00,000 advanced by the respondent with which the petitioner bought a Mahindra MN25Tipper of 25 tons. The loan amoun...
Tag this Judgment!Swastik Oil Refinery Private Limited Vs. Union of India and Anr
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-31-2017
ORDER SHEET WP No.506 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SWASTIK OIL REFINERY PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ANR BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 31st August, 2017. Appearance: Mr.R.K.Chowdhury, Adv.Mr.P.Chatterjee, Adv.For the petitioner. Mr.Somnath Ganguli, Adv.Mr.Bhaskar Prasad Banerjee, Adv.For the respondents. The Court :- A show cause-cum-demand notice dated August 8, 2016 is under challenge in the present writ petition. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that, although the petitioner has replied to the show cause notice, the same has not been disposed of till date. He submits that, the authorities have invoked the extended period of limitation as would appear from the impugned show cause-cum-demand notice. He submits that, if a claim made by the Department in the show cause notice is barred by limitation, then such show cause notice has to be treated without jurisdiction and a writ petition is i...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Cygnus Investments and Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Kamala Ranjan Chakra ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-30-2017
ORDER SHEET GA No.971 of 2017 With RVWO No.13 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.CYGNUS INVESTMENTS & FINANCE PVT.LTD.Versus KAMALA RANJAN CHAKRABORTY & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 30th August, 2017. Appearance: Mr.S.N.Mitra, Sr.Adv.Mr.A.Ray, Adv.Mr.Susanta Dutta, Adv.Mr.Debraj De, Adv.The Court : This is an application for review of an order passed on 17th February, 2017. In this application the Court was reminded that as an executing Court, the Court cannot go behind the decree and make an enquiry to find out whether the Arbitrator has properly exercised his jurisdiction. It is strenuously argued in support of the review application that there is an error apparent on the face of the record since the quoted portion of the report appearing from the impugned order, it would not appear that Deepak Traders was in any manner linked or related to the petitioner. In order to appreciate the grounds on which the re...
Tag this Judgment!Arvind Kayan Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-30-2017
WP No.504 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE ARVIND KAYAN Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date: 30th August, 2017 Appearance Mr.Koushik Chowdhury, Adv.with Ms.Sumita Shaw, Adv..for the petitioner Mr.Kaushik Chandra, ld. ASG with Md.Nizumuddin, Adv.Ms.Smita Das De, Adv..for the respondents The Court : The petitioner assails an order dated May 18, 2016 passed by the Tax Recovery Officer under Section 159 of the Income Tax, 1961 as affirmed by the Appellate Authority by its order dated July 6, 2017. The learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner is not the legal representative of the deceased. He submits that, although the petitioner is the son of the deceased, the petitioner had severed all relationship with the deceased in 1999. The petitioner had purchased the shares belonging to his deceased father during his lifetime for valuable consideration. The purchase of such...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay Singh and Anr. Vs. Hindustan Unilever Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-30-2017
In The High Court At Calcutta Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Original Side GA1944of 2017 GA2211of 2017 CS131of 2010 Sanjay Singh & Anr. versus Hindustan Unilever Limited Before : The Honble Justice Arijit Banerjee For the Plaintiffs : Mr.Reetobroto Mitra, Adv.Ms.Anindita Ghosh, Adv.Mr.Pradip Kumar Sarawagi, Adv.For the defendant : Ms.Moushumi Bhattacharya, Adv.Mr.S.Dutta, Adv.Ms.Anshumala Bansal, Adv.Heard On : 22.06.2017 & 18.07.2017 CAV On : 01.08.2017 Judgment On : 30.08.2017 Arijit Banerjee, J.:(1) G.A.No.1944 of 2017 has been taken out by the defendant for rejection of the plaint on the ground that the suit is barred by law. G.A.No.2211 of 2017 is also the defendants application for an order directing the plaintiffs to give inspection of the Partnership Deed whereby the firm Sanjay & Co.was constituted. I will consider the earlier application first. (2) Ms.Bhattacharya, learned counsel for the defendant contended that the defendant had appointed a partnership firm namely, Sa...
Tag this Judgment!Shelter Project Limited and Anr. Vs. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-30-2017
In the High Court At Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side WP1218of 2014 Shelter Project Limited & Anr. -Vs.The Kolkata Municipal Corporation & ORS.Before : The Honble Justice Arijit Banerjee For the petitioners Adv.: Mr.Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, Sr.Mr.Raghunath Chakraborty, Adv.Mr.Mahadeb Ahmed, Adv.Ms.Tanusree Das, Adv.For the respondents : Mr.Alok Kr. Ghosh, Adv.Mr.Gopal Ch. Das, Adv.Heard On 14.10.2015 : 10.06.2015, 16.06.2015, 25.08.2015, 16.11.2015, 18.11.2015, 09.12.2015, 19.07.2016, 24.08.2016, 30.08.2016, 11.02.2016 05.10.2016 15.11.2016 CAV On : 25.04.2017 Judgment On : 30.08.2017 Arijit Banerjee, J:(1) The petitioner company (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner) is the owner of two adjacent premises in Calcutta. Being aggrieved by the refusal of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation (in short the KMC) to grant amalgamation of the said two premises the petitioners have approached this Court. Contention of the petitioners:(2) The petitioner purchased a p...
Tag this Judgment!Lmj International Ltd. Vs. Sleepwell Industries Co. Ltd. and Anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-29-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE BEFORE: THE HONBLE JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN G.A. No.370 of 2013 C.S. No.185 of 2011 LMJ INTERNATIONAL LTD. Vs. SLEEPWELL INDUSTRIES CO. LTD. & ANR. For the Petitioner/Plaintiff : Mr. Surojit Nath Mitra, Sr. Adv., Mr. D.N. Sharma, Adv., Mr. S. Sarkar, Adv., Mrs. S. Mukhopadhyay, Adv., Mr. T. Aich, Adv. For the Defendants/Respondents : Mr. Tilak Kumar Bose, Sr. Adv., Mr. Sailendra Jain, Adv., Mr. Asit Dey, Adv. Hearing Concluded On :21.08.2017. Judgment On :29.08.2017. Soumen Sen, J.:- The defendant No.1 has filed this application essentially for deletion of the name of the defendant No.1 from the suit. The prayers made in the petition are:(a)(i) The plaint filed in the instant suit being C.S. No.185 of 2011 be dismissed; (ii) Alternatively, the defendant No.1 be deleted from the cause title of the plaint filed in the instant suit; (b)(i) Stay of all further proceedings in the instant suit; (ii) Alternatively, sta...
Tag this Judgment!Delta International Limited and Others Vs. Smt. Nupur Mitra and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-28-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE The Honble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE And The Honble JUSTICE SIDDHARTHA CHATTOPADHYAY APO No.390 of 2017 GA No.2728 of 2017 In CS No.151 of 2017 DELTA INTERNATIONAL LIMITED & OTHERS -VERSUSSMT. NUPUR MITRA & OTHERS For the Appellants: Mr Ranjan Deb, Sr Adv., Mr Kunal Gupta, Adv., Mr Rohitendra Chandra Deb, Adv., Mr Meghajit Mukherjee, Adv., Ms Shivangi Thard, Adv. Hearing concluded on: August 23, 2017. Date: August 28, 2017. SANJIB BANERJEE, J.: This is one of the rare appeals that has had to be heard and dealt with without reference to the respondents since the respondents had no right of audience at the stage that the order impugned was passed on July 24, 2017 in course of the trial court considering the appellants prayer for granting leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent. The leave sought was declined on the ground that the court did not have any jurisdiction to entertain the suit; not on the ground of terr...
Tag this Judgment!Yash Vardhan Mall Vs. Tejash Doshi
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-28-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE The Honble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE And The Honble JUSTICE SIDDHARTHA CHATTOPADHYAY APO No.359 of 2017 GA No.2552 of 2017 In PLA No.123 of 2016 YASH VARDHAN MALL -VERSUSTEJASH DOSHI For the Appellant: Mr S. P. Sarkar, Sr Adv., Mr Surojit N. Mitra, Sr Adv., Mr D. N. Sharma, Adv., Mr D. K. Jain, Adv., Mr Asim Chattopadhyay, Adv., Mr Subrata Das, Adv. For the Respondent: Mr Ratnanko Banerji, Sr Adv., Mr Nirmalya Dasgupta, Adv., Ms Urmila Chakaraborty, Adv. Hearing concluded on: August 22, 2017. Date: August 28, 2017. SANJIB BANERJEE, J.: The appeal arises out of proceedings for grant of a probate. By the order impugned dated June 28, 2017, the caveat lodged by the appellant has been discharged on the twin grounds that the appellant had no caveatable interest and that the affidavit in support of the caveat did not disclose any legal ground of objection to the grant of probate.2. The facts are not much in dispute and h...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »