Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Page 1 of about 721,787 results (3.086 seconds)

Jun 28 2017 (HC)

Gopi Das Mimani and Ors. Vs. Smt. Monika Daw and Ors.

Court : Kolkata

in the high court at calcutta ordinary original civil jurisdiction original side before: the hon ble justice soumen sen ga698of 2017 with cs244of 2016 gopi das mimani & ors.versus smt. monika daw & ors.for the petitioner : mr.surajit nath mitra, sr.adv.mr.sankarsan sarkar, adv.mr.aditya kanadia, adv.for the respondent : mr.shyam sarkar, adv.mr.arindam mukherjee, adv.mr.chyan gupta, adv.mr.m.m.chadra, adv.mr.s.roy, adv.hearing concluded on : 22.06.2017. date of judgment : 28.06.2017 soumen sen, j.:- the defendant no.8 has filed an application for rejection of the plaint on the ground that the suit is barred by limitation. the plaintiff has filed a suit on 19th september, 2016 praying, inter alia, for the following reliefs: a) a decree for declaration that the decree dated 28th july, 2004 passed in cs no.406 of 1998 (vandana real estates pvt.ltd.& ors., -versus smt. monika daw & ors.) is null and void and nonest; b) the decree dated 28th july, 2004 passed in cs no.406 of 1998 be set aside and/or cancelled and/or rescinded; c) a decree for declaration that the eight several deeds of conveyance, particulars whereof are se out in annexure d hereto be adjudged null and void and nonest; d) a decree for delivery up and cancellation of eight several deeds of conveyance, particulars whereof are set out in annexure d hereto; essential facts constituting the cause of action for filing the suit are: the plaintiffs have entered into an oral agreement in april/may 1987 with pranab chand daw .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 28 2017 (HC)

Although in G.Gopal Vs. C. Vaskarreported at 2008 Vol 10

Court : Kolkata

in the high court at calcutta ordinary original civil jurisdiction original side before: the hon ble justice soumen sen ga888of 2017 pla123of 2016 in the goods of : shrutika doshi (dec) for the petitioner for the respondent : mr.ratnanko banerjee, sr.adv.mr.nirmalya dasgupta, adv.mr.urmila chakraborty, adv.: mr.surajit nath mitra, sr.adv.mr.d.n.sharma, adv.mr.subrata das, adv.mr.asim chattopadhyay, adv.mr.dipak jain, adv.hearing concluded on : 22.06.2017 date of judgment : 28.06.2017 soumen sen, j.:- in this application for discharge of caveat the question arises whether the son-in-law of the uncle of the testatrix would have a caveatable interest. shorn of details, shrutika doshi, the testatrix appears to have made and published two wills during her lifetime. the firs.will was made and published on 1st march, 2013 and was registered on 22nd may, 2013. in between, the testatrix appears to have made and published another will on 22nd april, 2013 by which she revoked all earlier wills. in the firs.will, the testatrix appointed her husband shri tejash doshi as the sole executor and the trustee of the will, failing which shri yash vardhan mall, son of late jagmohan mall as the sole executor. the testatrix created a trust by the will. the minor daughters are the beneficiaries. under the firs.will, tejash doshi and yash vardhan mall were appointed as trustees who were to act jointly for the purpose of implementing the objects of the trust. it is provided that in case of vacancy, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 23 2017 (HC)

Sunil Kumar Sen Vs. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Court : Kolkata

order sheet w.p.no.1233 of 2013 g.a.no.1614 of 2014 g.a.no.1422 of 2016 g.a.no.200 of 2017 g.a.no.2741 of 2016 with w.p.no.843 of 2016 with w.p.no.28936(w) of 2013 can5024of 2016 in the high court at calcutta constitutional writ jurisdiction original side sunil kumar sen versus the kolkata municipal corporation & ors.before: the hon'ble justice harish tandon date : 23rd june, 2017. for petitioner : mr.surajit nath mitra, sr.adv.with mr.arindam mukherjee, ms.sananda mukhopadhyay & mrs.arundhati mukherjee, adversus for kmc : mr.barin banerjee with mr.swapan kr. debnath & mrs.sima chakraborty, adversus for cesc : mr.saurav choudhury, adv.for pvt.respondent nos.13&14 : mr.emon bhattacharya, adv.two recalcitrant tenants are putting spanner to the action required to be taken by the kolkata municipal corporation in order to avoid any casualty or loss of life. the corporation found the property in question to be in dangerous and ruinous condition and issued a notice under section 411 of the kolkata municipal corporation act, 1980. it is not in dispute that the entire property is/was occupied by the tenants. the petitioner, after such notice, approached the tenants and have stated in the instant writ petition that all such tenants have agreed with the proposal given to them except two of them who are vehemently resisting and/or contesting the instant writ petition. time and again several orders were passed in the instant writ petition so that the parties can arrive at the consensus .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 22 2017 (HC)

Upendra Das and Ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Court : Jharkhand

1 in the high court of jharkhand, ranchi l.p.a. no. 196 of 2004 1. upendra das 2. kamdeo das 3. muni das 4. naresh das 5. jagdish das 6. sikandar das 7. ram prasad das 8. shambhu ravidas 9. gholtan das 10. fucho das 11. bodan das 12. shiro das 13. shukar das 14. gopal das 15. jaykant das 16. katki das 17. basu das 18. mani harijan 19. birendra harijan 20. daso harijan ...appellants versus 1. the state of jharkhand.2. the commissioner, santhal pargana division, dumka.3. the deputy commissioner, godda.4. sub divisional officer, godda.5. the circle officer, godda.6. the 16 annas raiyat of mouza belari, through pradhan shrimant mirdha @ yadav 7. gokul harijan 8. naresh das 9. bhakan ravidas 10. sudan ravidas 11. lochan harijan 12. narayan harijan 13. satish harijan @ chhatish harijan 14. sita ram das 15. lewari das 16. devari das 17. khublal das ...respondents --- coram :- hon'ble mr. justice h.c. mishra hon'ble mr. justice ratnaker bhengra --- for the appellants : m/s. rahul kr. gupta & manoj kr. sah, advocates. for the state : mr. binod singh, s.c. (l&c) & mr. ashok kumar singh, j.c. to s.c. (l&c) for the pvt-resp . : mr. j.p. jha, sr. advocate & mr. p. k. choudhary, advocate --- 2 by court:- heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the state as well as learned counsel for the private respondents, who were the petitioners in c.w.j.c. no. 4232 of 1995(p).2. the appellants herein, claiming to be the 16 anna raiyats of mouza billari in the district of godda, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 21 2017 (HC)

Repose Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ms. Arati Ghosh and Ors.

Court : Kolkata

od-18 ga no.1736 of 2017 in apo no.217 of 2015 in cs no.348 of 2012 in the high court at calcutta civil appellate jurisdiction original side repose properties pvt.ltd.versus ms.arati ghosh & ors.before: the hon'ble justice sanjib banerjee and the hon'ble justice sahidullah munshi date : 21st june, 2017. appearance: ms.lopita banerjee, adv.mr.david mantosh, adv.mr.a.c.kar, adv.mr.p.c.pal chowdhury, adv.mr.d.n.mukherjee, adv.the court : in view of the good grounds shown, for the appellant not being represented on april 17, 2017, the order dismissing the appeal on such date is recalled and the appeal is readmitted. the order under appeal arises in a suit for specific performance and the interlocutory court has imposed a condition on the appellant plaintiff to deposit a sum of rs.1 crore to enjoy the usual order of an injunction restraining the defendants from dealing with the property or creating any third party rights in respect thereof during the pendency of the suit. it is the submission of the appellant that the current market value of the property was not referred to in the affidavit used by the defendants and it could not also have been ascertained from the deed or deeds of conveyance executed by the other erstwhile co-owners in favour of the appellant that the share of the defendants in the property was of value in excess of rs.1.5 crore. there does not appear to be any law that requires the parties to sell or purchase any property at the prevailing market rate. at any .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 21 2017 (HC)

Mohit Prasad Vs. M/S Lakhi Egg Roll Shop and Anr

Court : Jharkhand

in the high court of jharkhand at ranchi w.p.(l) no. 2908 of 2010 --- mohit prasad --- ---- petitioner versus 1. m/s. lakhi egg roll shop, sakchi, jamshedpur 2. lakhi kant mahapartra --- --- respondents --- coram:the hon ble mr. justice aparesh kumar singh ---- for the petitioner : mr. sanjay kumar dwivedi, adv. for the respondents : ---- 06/21.06.2017 heard learned counsel for the petitioner. respondents, despite service of notice, have not entered appearance. by the impugned order dated 06.02.2010 learned presiding officer, labour court, jamshedpur has rejected the claim of the petitioner for reinstatement along with back wages and other consequential benefits in b.s. case no. 13 of 2002 (annexure-5). facts, in brief, as carved out from the pleadings on record are as follows:- (i) petitioner claimed to have joined as a cook on monthly wages of rs. 1800/- per month from 15 th january, 1997. he has alleged termination by the opposite parties/respondents with effect from 09th july, 2002 without any reasonable cause for which neither any prior notice was issued nor one month notice pay including compensation was paid. (ii) according to the petitioner, he had committed no mis-conduct but he presumes that on some complaint made to the employees provident fund commissioner as well as employees state insurance corporation, his services have been dispensed with by an oral termination order. (iii) despite representation made through registered post no reply was given by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 21 2017 (HC)

Shanti Kumar Surana Vs. Pankaj Shah

Court : Kolkata

order sheet cs53of 2016 in the high court at calcutta ordinary original civil jurisdiction original side s.k.surana (huf) rep. by its karta shanti kumar surana versus pankaj shah before: the hon'ble justice sahidullah munshi date : 21st june, 2017. appearance: mr.satadeep bhattacharya, adv.mr.jai kumar surana, adv.mr.suvaraj shaw, adv.mr.d.surana, adv.for the plaintiff the court : this suit is for a decree for a sum of rs.16,80,500/- (rupees sixteen lakh eighty thousand five hundred) only, inclusive of interest @ 15% per annum from the defendant. summons were issued and served upon the defendant but no one appeared and, ultimately, the suit was fixed for hearing as an undefended suit. fact pleaded in the plaint may be summarized as follows : the plaintiff deals in investment in security commodity and finance trade. the defendant represented to the plaintiff that he is engaged in a business and needed money and for such purpose he approached the plaintiff for a one-time accommodation loan of rs.50,00,000/- (rupees fifty lakh) only, for its business purposes at the office of plaintiff. it agreed to disburs.the same as and by way of loan to the defendant on condition that a) the plaintiff would provide the defendant the sum of rs.50,00,000/- as and by way of one-time accommodation loan, b) the defendant would repay the said loan amount within the month of october, 2013, c) the defendant would pay interest @ 15% per annum on the aforesaid loan from time to time. on the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 20 2017 (HC)

Prabhu Poly Color Ltd Vs. Reena Organics Pvt.Ltd.

Court : Kolkata

od-7 apo no.306 of 2017 aco no.65 of 2017 aco no.66 of 2017 in cp no.288 of 2016 in the high court at calcutta civil appellate jurisdiction original side prabhu poly color ltd versus reena organics pvt.ltd.before: the hon'ble justice sanjib banerjee the hon'ble justice sahidullah munshi date : 20th june, 2017. appearance: mr.tilok bose, sr.adv.mr.raj ratna sen, adv.mr.a.p. gomes, adv.ms.a.jain, adv.mr.ratnanko banerji, sr.adv.mr.a.sinha, adv.mr.s.mitra, adv.the court : despite the initial sound and fury, there appears to be no defence to the claim after all. the appellant questions the propriety of an order by which a creditor s winding-up petition has been admitted. the claim was on account of two sets of high-seas sales and some local transactions. upon the statutory notice being issued by the petitioning creditor on january 12, 2016, the appellant responded on february 15, 2016, alleging that one manish khanna, who was previously a director of the appellant company, was responsible for the chennai operations of the company and it was discovered that such person had acted against the interests of the company and had falsified the company s books and records and pilfered its stocks and assets. it was also alleged in response to the statutory notice that the said khanna was in league with the directors of the claimant. towards the end of the letter of february 15, 2016, the company asserted that there was nothing in the company s records to show the delivery of the goods .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 19 2017 (HC)

Shri Bipad Bhanjan Sarkar Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Prev.) Kolkata ...

Court : Kolkata

order sheet wp no.587 of 2011 in the high court at calcutta constitutional writ jurisdiction original side shri bipad bhanjan sarkar versus commissioner of customs (prev.) kolkata & ors.before: the hon'ble justice debangsu basak date : 19th june, 2017. appearance: mr.arijit chakraborti, adv.mr.nilotpal chowdhury, adv.for the petitioner. mr.uday sankar bhattacharjee, adv.mr.bhaskar prasad banerjee, adv.for the respondents. the court : the petitioner claims return of 73.35 kgs/quintals of sugar or the value in respect thereof and the interest for the period when a bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner stood wrongly invoked and later refunded. learned advocate for the petitioner submits that, the border security force (bsf) had initially seized 1000 kgs/quintals of the sugar belonging to the petitioner. the bsf thereafter had made over the entire seized sugar to the customs.the customs had initiated confiscation proceedings against the petitioner. he refers to the seized memo of the customs which records that 1000 kgs/quintals was seized by the customs.he refers to the show-cause notice also. he submits that, the petitioner had replied to the show-cause notice. the show-cause proceedings had resulted in an order of confiscation dated march 5, 2008. an appeal was carried against such order in original which was allowed on september 5, 2008. in the interregnum, the petitioner being entitled to provisional release of the seized goods had applied for the same. the high court by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 19 2017 (HC)

Deputy General Manager Bank of India Vs. Shri Parameshwar Das

Court : Jharkhand

in the high court of jharkhand at ranchi w.p.(l) no. 56 of 2016 deputy general manager, bank of india, jamshedpur zone, jamshedpur .... petitioner vrs. shri parameshwar das .... respondent with w.p.(l) no. 5049 of 2015 parameshwar das .... petitioner vrs. deputy general manager, bank of india, jamshedpur zone, jamshedpur .... respondent .... coram: hon ble mr. justice aparesh kumar singh for the petitioner : m/s a. allam & nehala sharmin (wpl no.56/16) : mr. kaustav panda (wpl no. 5049/15) for the respondent : mr. kaustav panda (wpl no.56/16) : m/s a. allam & nehala sharmin (wpl no. 5049/15) 05/19.06.2017 heard learned counsel for the parties.2. the impugned award dated 26.9.2014 (annexure-5) passed in reference case no. 1 of 2013, challenged by both management of the bank and the workman for their own reasons reads as under:- by order no. l-12012/24/2012-ir (b-h) dated 23/11/2012 the central government in the ministry of labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2a) of section 10 of the industrial disputes act, 1947, referred the following disputes for adjudication to this tribunal: schedule whether the action of the management of bank of india in terminating the services of shri parameshwar das w.e.f. 15.4.2010, is legal and justified? whether the demand of shri das for his reinstatement in bank service with full back wages and continuity of service with all benefits is just and proper? what relief the concerned .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //