Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Dec-08-2016
In the High Court At Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side WP733of 2014 Price Water House & Anr. -Vs.Commissioner of Income Tax-XIX & ORS.With WP735of 2014 Lovelock & Lewes & Anr. -Vs.Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata-XIX & ORS.Before For the petitioners : The Honble Justice Arijit Banerjee : Mr.S.Pal, Sr.Adv.Mr.D.Kundu, Sr.Adv.Mr.I Nandi, Adv.Mr.D.P.Samanta, Adv.Mr.P.Das, Adv.For the Respondents : Mr.R.N.Bandopadhyay, Adv.Mr.P.Dudhoria, Adv.Heard On : 01.04.2015, 13.05.2015, 15.07.2015, 19.08.2015 26.08.2015, 31.08.2015, 08.09.2015, 22.09.2015 09.10.2015, 26.11.2015, 15.12.2015, 21.12.2015 11.02.2016, 19.05.2016, 30.06.2016 CAV On : 19.07.2016 Judgment On : 08.12.2016 Arijit Banerjee, J.: (1) These two writ petitions arise out of similar facts and involve the same question of law. Accordingly, the two writ petitions were taken together for hearing and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. (2) The subject matter of challenge in the two writ petiti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Oct-05-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE PRESENT : THE HONBLE JUSTICE PATHERYA AID No.1 of 2010 AID No.2 of 2010 AID No.3 of 2010 RECKITT BENCKISER AUSTRALIA PTY. LTD.VERSUS CONTROLLER OF PATENTS AND DESIGNS & ORS.For the Appellant : Mr.S.N.Mukherjee, Sr.Adv., Mr.Ratnanko Banerjee, Adv., Mr.Soumya Choudhury, Adv., Mr.Subhojit Roy, Adv., Ms.Debashri Dutta, Adv.For the Respondent No.3 : Mr.Goutam Chakraborty, Sr.Adv., Mr.Sudipto Sarkar, Sr.Adv., Mr.Sayantan Bose, Adv., Mr.Devajyoti Bhattacharya, Adv.Heard on : 07.01.2011, 21.01.2011, 04.02.2011, 10.02.2011, 25.02.2011, 08.03.2011, 04.04.2011 & 12.04.2011. Judgement on : 5th October, 2016. PATHERYA J. : AID1of 2010, AID2of 2010 and AID3of 2010 are appeals filed by the appellants from the order of the Joint Controller of Patents & Designs, the respondent no.2 dated 28th March, 2008. The said order was passed on cancellation applications filed by the respondent no.3 in respect of the appellants design nos.184135, 184...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Sep-14-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE BEFORE: THE HONBLE JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN A.C.O. No.74 of 2016 A.P.O. No.190 of 2016 DR. JAYANTA KUMAR & ORS. VS. ASTHA NURSING HOME PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. For the Petitioners : Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. S.N. Mookherjee, Sr. Adv., Ratnanko Banerjee,Sr. Adv., Aniruddha Roy, Adv., Nirmalya Dasgupta, Adv., Dibanath Dey, Adv. For the Respondents : Mr. Jishnu Saha, Sr. Adv., Mr. Zeeshan Haque, Adv., Mr. Debobrat Upadhyay, Adv. Heard On :12. 07.2016, 03.07.2016, 10.08.2016, 17.08.2016, 24.08.2016, 31.08.2016 Judgment On :14. h September, 2016 Soumen Sen, J.:- This appeal is directed against an order passed by the Company Law Board, Kolkata Branch on 9th May, 2016 in a proceeding arising out of Sections 111A, 235, 284, 397, 398, 399, 402, 403 and 406 of the Companies Act, 1956. The control and management of one Astha Nursing Home being the respondent No.1 was the subject matter in the company proceeding initiated by the present ap...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Sep-02-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE PRESENT : THE HONBLE JUSTICE PATHERYA AID No.2 of 2008 YASH PLASTOMET PVT.LTD.VERSUS THE ASSISTANT CONTROLLER OF PATENTS & DESIGNS & ANR. For the Appellant : Mr.Ranjan Bachwat, Adv., Mr.Debnath Ghosh, Adv.For the Respondent : Mr.Anjan Sen, Adv., Mr.Sayantan Bose, Adv., Mr.Sourav Moitra, Adv., Mr.Avirup Chatterjee, Adv.Heard on : 10.02.2011, 15.02.2011,22.02.2011, 01.03.2011, 10.03.2011, 15.03.2011, 17.03.2011 & 24.03.2011. Judgement on : 2nd September, 2016. PATHERYA J. : This appeal has been filed by the appellant from order dated 16th January, 2008 whereby the application of the appellant for cancellation of the respondent no.2s design no.187706 dated 2nd January, Container registered under Class 09-03 was dismissed. 2002 for Counsel for the appellant submits that the respondent no.2 has obtained registration of design contained in Container. In October 1997 a publication was made in the Andhra Pradesh Times. There can ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jul-28-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE GA884OF2016GA1095OF2016IN CS88OF2016ISHA DISTRIBUTION HOUSE PRIVATE LIMITED -VersusADITYA BIRLA NUVO LIMITED AND ANOTHER For the Plaintiff: Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Pratap Chatterjee, Sr Adv., Mainak Bose, Adv., Nemani Srinivas, Adv., Amitabh Ray, Adv., Ankur Jain, Adv. For the Defendant No.1: Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr S. N. Mukherjee, Sr Adv., Ratnanko Banerji, Sr Adv., D. Basu Mallick, Adv., Kumarjit Mukherjee, Adv., Sounava Basu, Adv., Soumya Ray, Adv., Anshul Sehgal, Adv. For the Defendant No.2: Mr Suvodeep Chakraborty, Adv., Mr Saunak Sengupta, Adv. Hearing concluded on: July 25, 2016. BEFORE SANJIB BANERJEE, Judge Date: July 28, 2016. SANJIB BANERJEE, J.: The earlier petition is by the plaintiff for an interlocutory injunction. The later petition is by the first defendant for revocation of the leave granted under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent at the time of the receipt of the suit on the ground of the two distri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jul-15-2016
In the High Court At Calcutta Civil Appellate Jurisdiction In Appeal from an order passed in its Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Original Side APOT71of 2016 GA753of 2016 GA1881of 2016 WP146of 2016 Triveni Engicons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. -vs.- RITES Ltd. & Ors. Before : The Honble The Chief Justice Dr. Manjula Chellur & The Honble Justice Arijit Banerjee For the appellants : Mr. Abhrajit Mitra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Kishore Dutta, Sr. Adv. Mr. Chayan Gupta, Adv. Mr. S.S. Banerjee, Adv. For RITES Ltd. : Mr. Jishnu Chowdhury, Adv. For South Eastern : Mr. Tilak Bose, Sr. Adv. Coalfield Ltd. For Jhajharia Nirman Pvt. : Mr. S. N. Mookerji, Sr. Adv. Ltd. Mr. Satadeep Bhattacharya, Adv. Mr. S. K. Kakrania, Adv. Mr. Sanjib Seni, Adv. Mr. Souvik Kundu, Adv. Heard On :23. 02.2016, 25.02.2016, 01.03.2016, 10.03.2016 15.03.2016 CAV On :29. 03.2016 Judgment On :15. 07.2016 Arijit Banerjee, J.:- (1) This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 19 February, 2016 passed by the learned First Court in W.P. N...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : May-20-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WP2905(W) of 2016 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED -VERSUSSENIOR JOINT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES AND OTHERS For the Petitioner: Mr R. N. Bajoria, Sr Adv., Mr Avra Majumder, Adv., Mr Akhilesh Gupta, Adv., Ms Sudeshna Mazumder, Adv. AND IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE WP324of 2016 With WP1163of 2015 With WP325of 2016 SHELL INDIA MARKETS PRIVATE LIMITED -VERSUSSENIOR JOINT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, CORPORATE DIVISION AND OTHERS AND WP403of 2016 SHELL INDIA MARKETS PRIVATE LIMITED -VERSUSSENIOR JOINT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, LARGE TAX PAYER UNIT AND OTHERS AND WP404of 2016 SHELL INDIA MARKETS PRIVATE LIMITED -VERSUSSENIOR JOINT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, LARGE TAX PAYER UNIT AND OTHERS For the Petitioner Mr Sumit Kumar Chakraborty, Adv., in WP324of 2016: Mr Piyal Gupta, Adv., Ms Payel Verma, Adv. For the Petitioners Mr Sumit Kumar Chakraborty, Adv....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : May-20-2016
ORDER SHEET G.A.No.868 of 2016 A.P.O.T.No.84 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE FUTURE MOBILES & ACCESSORIES LTD.Versus M/S.SANJEEVANI HEALTH & LIFESTYLE PVT.LTD.BEFORE : The Honble JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE -AndThe Honble JUSTICE SAHIDULLAH MUNSHI Date : 20th May, 2016. Appearance : Mr.Arindam Mukherjee with Mr.Navneet Misra, Adversus Mr.Debdutta Sen, Adv.In this appeal, the appellant has challenged an order dated 5th February, 2016 passed by the learned Single Judge, dismissing the appellants application for review of an earlier order dated 8th November, 2013 passed by the learned Single Judge under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, hereinafter referred to as the 1996 Act. The respondent and the appellant entered into two agreements, both dated 6th December, 2008, one of which was a sub-lease agreement, whereby the respondent agreed to let out 1063 square feet of super built up area in the ground floor of City Centre M...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : May-13-2016
FORM NO.(J2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE Present: Honble Justice Girish Chandra Gupta And Hon'ble Justice Asha Arora GA NO.509 OF2016WITH ITAT NO.113 OF2016RAJMANDIR ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED. Versus PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA III, KOLAKTA. Advocate for the Appellant: Mr.N.K. Poddar, Sr.Adv.Mr.Vineet Tibrewal, Adv.Advocate for the Respondent: Mr.A.K. Ghosal, Sr.Adv.Mr.P.Dudhoria, Adv.Date of Hearing: 15.03.2016, 16.03.2016, 17.03.2016, 18.03.2016, 21.03.2016, 22.03.2016, 24.03.2016, 29.03.2016, 31.03.2016, 01.04.2016, 04.04.2016, 05.04.2016. Judgement delivered on:13th May 2016. GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA, J. The appeal is directed against a judgement and order dated 3rd November, 2015 passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata, D Bench in ITA No.882/KOL/2013 pertaining to the assessment year 2009-10 upholding an order dated 22nd March, 2013 passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assesse...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Apr-06-2016
GA No.1912 of 2013 CS No.74 of 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE EXCEL DEALCOMM PVT.LTD.Versus ASSET RECONSTUCTION COMPANY (INDIA) LTD.& ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date : 6th April, 2016. Appearance Mr.Asit Dey, Adv.Mr.Sabyasachi Chowdhury, Adv.Mr.Subhankar Nag, Adv.Mr.T.Dey, Adv.Mr.Bimal Chatterjee, Sr.Adv.Mr.Rudraman Bhattacharya, Adv.Mr.Pratik Ghosh, Adv.The Court : In an application seeking revocation of leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent, the defendant asserts that the suit is not only liable to fail being a suit for land but because of the Forum Selection Clause, this Court lacks jurisdiction and it is a Court/ Tribunal at Mumbai which is competent to entertain the disputes raised in the instant suit. The plaint case proceeds that the defendant No.1, a securitisation company under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of the Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, of which the...
Tag this Judgment!