Kolkata Court August 2017 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.
Kamrun Nessa Vs. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-22-2017
ORDER SHEET WP4242017 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE KAMRUN NESSA Versus THE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date : 22nd August, 2017. Mr.Ramij Munsi, Ms.Ankita Mitra, Advs., for the petitioner. Mr.Maidul Islam Kayal, Adv., for the respondent no.7. Mr.Manoj Malhotra, Mr.Suman Dey, Advs., for the State. Mr.Gurudas Mitra, Ms.Manisha Nath, Advs., for the KMC. The Court : It is evident from the records that an unscrupulous developer/promoter has used his financial and other sources to construct a building without obtaining sanctioned building plan from the Corporation. Such promoters are some time fly by night operators and after committing a mischief suddenly eloped creating third party interest in respect of the building constructed illegally. The bona fide purchasers are duped by such promoters/developers and to suffer consequences in the event of demolition even after paying the consideration mo...
West Bengal Electronic Industry Development Corporation Ltd. Vs. Shant ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-22-2017
Form No.J(2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE BEFORE: THE HONBLE JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE AND THE HONBLE JUSTICE SANKAR ACHARYA APO No.81 of 2016 WP No.895 of 2009 West Bengal Electronic Industry Development Corporation Ltd. Vs. Shanta Projects (P) Ltd. & Ors. With APO No.82 of 2016 WP No.95 of 2010 West Bengal Electronic Industry Development Corporation Ltd. Vs. Shanta Projects (P) Ltd. & Ors. Advocates for the Appellant: Mr. Biswarup Bhattacharjee, Mr. Anil Dhar, Mr. Sularbhanu Bhattacharya. Advocates for the State: Ms. Chama Mookherji (senior Advocate) Mr. Sadananta Ganguly, Ms. Jyotsna Roy Mukherjee. Advocates for the petitioner: Ms. Vinita Meharia, Mr. Soumabho Ghose, Mr. Amit Nag, Ms. Trisha Mukherjee. Heard On:13. 05.2016, 23.06.2016, 18.11.2016, 21.08.2017. Judgment On:22. d August, 2017. Aniruddha Bose, J.:1. Both these appeals have been preferred by West Bengal Electronics Industries Development Corporation Limited (WEBEL) assailing a com...
Mitali Ghose Vs. The Board of Trustees for the Port of Kolkata and Ors ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-22-2017
ORDER SHEET WP480of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE MITALI GHOSE Versus THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR THE PORT OF KOLKATA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE Dr. SAMBUDDHA CHAKRABARTI Date : 22nd August, 2017. Appearance: Mr.Soumya Majumdar, Adv.Mr.Victor Chatterjee, Adv.Mr.Tridib Chakraborty, Adv.for the petitioner. Mr.Arunabha Ghosh, Sr.Adv.Mr.Somnath Bose, Adv.for the respondent nos.1, 2 and 3. Mr.Ashok Kumar Jena, Adv.for the respondent no.4. The Court : Let the affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept on record. Heard learned Advocates for the respective parties. The writ petition should be decided on affidavits. Let affidavit-in-opposition be filed within four weeks from date. Let affidavit-in-reply within two weeks thereafter. thereto, if any, be filed Let this matter appear for hearing in the list on October 31, 2017. This is a case where the petitioner holding the post of Deputy Labour Kolkata Port Adviser Trust and has Indu...
Sikaria Divinity Private Limited Vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-18-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Original Side A.P. 543 of 2017 Sikaria Divinity Private Limited vs. State of West Bengal For the petitioners:- Mr. Surojit Nath Mitra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shyamal Sarkar. Sr. Adv. Mr. Arindam Mukherjee Mr. Swarvanu Saha Advocates For the State:- Mr. Jishnu Chowdhury, Addl. Govt. Pleader Mr. Paritosh Sinha Mr. Arindam Mondal Advocates Judgement On: - 18th August, 2017 I.P. MUKERJI, J.The river Hooghly, while flowing down the plains of Bengal towards the sea, has branched out, upstream of Chuchura in the Hooghly District, to form a beautiful island in the middle of the river, measuring about 75 acres. It is called Sabuj Dweep.. It has trees and plants of many kinds and recreational facilities which attract thousands of tourists over the year. The land belongs to the Department of Tourism, Government of West Bengal. This department conceived of the idea of developing the island into a eco- tourism resort. On 14th August, 2015 it ...
Swamina International Private Limited and Anr. Vs. Income Tax Settleme ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-17-2017
W.P. No.431 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side Swamina International Private Limited & Anr. Vs. Income Tax Settlement Commission (IT & WT) & Ors. For the Petitioners : Mr. J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate Mr. Sanjay Kumar Baid, Advocate Ms. Anupa Banerjee, Advocate For the Respondents : Md. Nizamuddin, Advocate Hearing concluded on : August 9, 2017 Judgment on : August 17, 2017 DEBANGSU BASAK, J.:- 1. The petitioners have challenged an Order dated February 28, 2014 passed by the Settlement Commission exercising jurisdiction under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961.2. Learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners has submitted that, the petitioners had made a reference to the Settlement Commission in respect of six assessment years commencing from 2001-2002 to 2006-2007. The Settlement Commission had added Rs.6.97 Crores as profit and had taken profit at the rate of 8 per cent of gross turn over and has calculated the income of the first...
Mittal Technopack Private Limited and Anr. Vs. The Development Commiss ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-17-2017
W.P. No.179 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side Mittal Technopack Private Limited & Anr. Vs. The Development Commissioner & Ors. For the Petitioners : Mr. Uday Chandra Jha, Advocate Mrs. Maheswari Sharma, Advocate Mrs. Tulika Roy, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Tapas Kumar Chatterjee, Advocate Mrs. Debjani Roy, Advocate Hearing concluded on : August 7, 2017 Judgment on : August 17, 2017 DEBANGSU BASAK, J.:- 1. The petitioners have sought for a declaration that the notices dated March 15, 2014, April 17, 2014 and October 20, 2014 are null and void. They have also demanded payment of a sum of Rs.42,81,604/- from the respondents.2. Learned Advocate for the petitioners has submitted that, the first petitioner is an Export Oriented Unit (EOU). The first petitioner is carrying on manufacturing activity since 2006. It was receiving Central Sales Tax (CST) refund from the Development Commissioner, Falta, Special Economic Zone. The first peti...
Bansal Tea Company Vs. Hershey India Private Limited and Anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-16-2017
ORDER SHEET GA No.994 of 2016 GA No.2757 of 2015 GA No.1469 of 2012 CS No.62 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE BANSAL TEA COMPANY Versus HERSHEY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date: 16th August, 2017 Appearance Mr.Dhirendra Nath Sharma, Adv.with Mr.Sachidananda Pandey, Adv..for the plaintiff Mr.R.K. Khanna, Adv.with Mr.S.E. Huda, Adv..for the defendants The Court : GA No.994 of 2016 has been taken out by the plaintiff praying for a direction on the department for issuing a fresh writ of summons for being served upon the defendants and for extension of the returnable date of the writ of summons. The suit was instituted in the year 2010. The reasons pleaded for non-service of the writ of summons on the defendants till date are in paragraphs 23, 24 and 25 of the petition, which read as follows: 23. Your petitioner states that from 2010 till 2012 several interlocutory applications were taken ou...
... Plaintiff Vs. Samarendra Kumar Bardhan
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-11-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA TESTAMENTARY & INTESTATE JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE TESTAMENTARY SUIT NO.10 OF2014P.L.A. No.48 OF2005IN THE GOODS OF : DR. SUDHANYA KUMAR BARDHAN AND SACHINDRA KUMAR BARDHAN ... Plaintiff -VersusSAMARENDRA KUMAR BARDHAN ... Defendant BEFORE: THE HONBLE JUSTICE SAHIDULLAH MUNSHI August 11, 2017. Mr. Joyak Gupta, Mr. B. Mullick For the plaintiff Mr. Bimalendu Das For the defendant The Court : This P.L.A. No.48 of 2005 was filed by Sachindra Kumar Bardhan praying for grant of probate to the Will and Testament dated 7th September, 1997 of the deceased Dr. Sudhanya Kumar Bardhan. A caveat was lodged by Samarendra Kumar Bardhan, who, subsequently filed affidavit in support of the caveat and the P.L.A. was converted into a contentious cause and renumbered as T.S. No.10 of 2014. In the petition the propounder has made out a case that one Dr. Sudhanya Kumar Bardhan residing at 11/1A, Benoy Bose Road under Bhawanipore Police Station, Kolkata 700025, executed his ...
Pcm Strescon Overseas Ventures Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Deputy Commissioner o ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-11-2017
ORDER SHEET WP No.214 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE PCM STRESCo.OVERSEAS VENTURES LTD.& ANR. Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE13).KOLKATA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 11th August, 2017. Mr.Mr.Mr.Mr.J.P.Khaitan, Sr.Adv.P.K.Jhunjhunwala, Adv.Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Adv.S.Rudra, Adv.for the petitioners Mr.Tapas Kr. Chatterjee, Mr.Prithu Dudhoria, Adversus for Union of India The Court : The petitioners assail a notice issued by the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) dated April 16, 2015 and the consequential steps taken by the department pursuant thereto. Learned senior advocate for the petitioners submits that, the fiRs.petitioner has branch units located at two countries apart from India. They are at Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirate. He submits that, there was no business transaction far less an international business transaction between the unit in India and the two branch units at th...
Standard Shoe Sole and Mould (India) Limited Vs. Idbi Bank Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-11-2017
O-15 GA No.2068 of 2017 APO No.336 of 2017 In CS No.345 of 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE STANDARD SHOE SOLE AND MOULD (INDIA) LIMITED versus IDBI BANK LIMITED BEFORE: The Honble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE AND The Honble JUSTICE SIDDHARTHA CHATTOPADHYAY Date: 11th August, 2017 Appearance: Mr.Malay Kr. Ghosh, Sr.Adv.Ms.S.Ganguli, Adv.Mr.A.Haldar, Adv.Mr.Hirak Kr. Mitra, Sr.Mr.Mohit Gupta, Mr.R.C. Prusti, Ms.M.Kabi, Adv.Adv.Adv.Adv.The Court: The plaintiff in a suit pertaining to accounts and recovery of money complains of an order by which the written statement has been allowed to be amended by obliterating an admission. As to such an order being appellable, a judgment reported at (1981).SCC8(Shah Babulal Khimji v. Jayaben D. Kania) has been referred to and paragraph 151 of such report placed. The Supreme Court quoted with approval a previous judgment of such Court that observed that for an order to be regarded as a judgment and considered to ...