Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Bhandari Builders Ltd. Vs. Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd. and anr.

Bhandari Builders Ltd. vs Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd. and anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided Nov 08, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1096899

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kolkata High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
MRTP

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

MRTP

Key legal issue
MRTP

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Bhandari Builders Ltd.

Respondent

Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd. and anr.

Excerpt

order sheet in the high court at calcutta ordinary original civil jurisdiction original side ga no.2917 of 2013 with cs no.610 of 2001 bhandari builders ltd.versus hindustan steel works construction ltd.& anr. ga no.2846 of 2013 with cs no.611 of 2001 bhandari builders ltd.versus hindustan steel works construction ltd.& anr. ga no.2916 of 2013 with cs no.613 of 2001 bhandari builders ltd.versus hindustan steel works construction ltd.& anr. ga no.2915 of 2013 with cs no.616 of 2001 bhandari builders ltd.versus hindustan steel works construction ltd.& anr. before: the hon'ble justice soumen sen date : 8th november, 2013. appearance: mr.debabrata roy chowdhuri, sr.adv.mr.bijon majumder, adv.mr.jayanto dutta, adv..for the plaintiff. mr.supriyo bose, adv.mr.s.n.ghosh, adv..for the defendant no.1. the court: by consent of the parties the aforesaid matters are taken up on mentioning. the learned advocate on record of the plaintiff was directed by an order dated 30th september, 2013 to supply a copy of the plaint to the advocate on record of the defendant no.1 on or before 4th october, 2013 so as to enable the defendant to file a written statement on or before 7th november, 2013 upon payment of cost of rs.7000/- to the plaintiff. it is an admitted position that the plaint was not supplied to the advocate on record of the defendant within the stipulated period. the advocate on record of the plaintiff had tendered the cost but the same was not accepted by the plaintiff. in view thereof the time to file written statement is extended till 29th november, 2013. a consolidated cost of rs.28,000/- has been made over to the advocate on record of the plaintiff in court. the order dated 30th september, 2013 is accordingly modified. all parties concerned are to act on a signed photocopy of this order on the usual undertakings. (soumen sen, j.) sp/

Full Judgment

ORDER

SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE GA No.2917 of 2013 With CS No.610 of 2001 BHANDARI BUILDERS LTD.Versus HINDUSTAN STEEL WORKS CONSTRUCTION LTD.& ANR.

GA No.2846 of 2013 With CS No.611 of 2001 BHANDARI BUILDERS LTD.Versus HINDUSTAN STEEL WORKS CONSTRUCTION LTD.& ANR.

GA No.2916 of 2013 With CS No.613 of 2001 BHANDARI BUILDERS LTD.Versus HINDUSTAN STEEL WORKS CONSTRUCTION LTD.& ANR.

GA No.2915 of 2013 With CS No.616 of 2001 BHANDARI BUILDERS LTD.Versus HINDUSTAN STEEL WORKS CONSTRUCTION LTD.& ANR.

BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 8th November, 2013.

Appearance: Mr.Debabrata Roy Chowdhuri, Sr.Adv.Mr.Bijon Majumder, Adv.Mr.Jayanto Dutta, Adv..for the plaintiff.

Mr.Supriyo Bose, Adv.Mr.S.N.Ghosh, Adv..for the defendant no.1.

The Court: By consent of the parties the aforesaid matters are taken up on mentioning.

The learned Advocate on Record of the plaintiff was directed by an order dated 30th September, 2013 to supply a copy of the plaint to the Advocate on Record of the defendant no.1 on or before 4th October, 2013 so as to enable the defendant to file a written statement on or before 7th November, 2013 upon payment of cost of Rs.7000/- to the plaintiff.

It is an admitted position that the plaint was not supplied to the Advocate on Record of the defendant within the stipulated period.

The Advocate on Record of the plaintiff had tendered the cost but the same was not accepted by the plaintiff.

In view thereof the time to file written statement is extended till 29th November, 2013.

A consolidated cost of Rs.28,000/- has been made over to the Advocate on Record of the plaintiff in Court.

The order dated 30th September, 2013 is accordingly modified.

All parties concerned are to act on a signed photocopy of this order on the usual undertakings.

(SOUMEN SEN, J.) sp/

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial