Skip to content


Parekh Aluminex Ltd. Vs. R . D. Fan Ltd and ors. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Kolkata High Court

Decided On

Judge

Appellant

Parekh Aluminex Ltd.

Respondent

R . D. Fan Ltd and ors.

Excerpt:


.....taking advantage of the matter not being in the list, the respondent is proceeding with the contempt. hence, this application by the appellant. the facts so narrated above as we gather from mr.sarkar, learned senior advocate appearing for the appellant is quite unusual. it is a serious allegation. the matter was released on august 12, 2013 on the personal ground by one of the hon’ble judges of the earlier bench. the appellant applied for an assignment on august 22, 2013. the present bench is taking up the determination since after puja vacation. the matter did not appear before this bench despite being mentioned on december 20, 2013. we have asked mr.sarkar to take the responsibility by someone on behalf of his advocate-on-record in support of the allegation as recorded above. mr.sarkar is however, enable to do so in view of the fact, his present advocate-on-record has taken change on january 13, 2014. we direct the registrar, original side to make a thorough enquiry. we would request the learned advocates for both sides to assist the learned registrar, original side in the matter. the report must be filed by monday next. (ashim kumar banerjee, j.) (arijit banerjee, j.) akb/

Judgment:


ORDER

SHEET G.A.No.2340 of 2013 G.A.No.313 of 2014 A.P.O.T.No.373 of 2013 With C.S.No.180 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE PAREKH ALUMINEX LTD.Versus R .D.FAN LTD AND ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE And The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 3rd February, 2014.

Appearance : Mr.Shyam Prosad Sarkar, Sr.Adv.Mr.Tarique Quasimuddin, Adv.Ms.Sanchita Chaudhuri, Adv.Mr.Sounak Ghosh, Adv..for the petitioner.

Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Adv.Mr.Rajashree Kajaria, Adv.Mr.Jisnhu Chowdhury, Adv.The Court : This appeal was filed from the order dated July 8, 2013.

The appeal was probably filed in the fiRs.week of August, 2013.

The matter appeared before the earlier Bench when the matter was released on personal ground by one of the Hon’ble Judges, on August 12, 2013.

Mr.Sarkar, learned senior advocate appearing for the appellant would contend, the necessary assignment was applied on August 22, 2013 as would appear from page 75 of the application.

But the matter was not assigned.

On December 20, 2013 the matter was said to have been mentioned before this Bench.

Since then the matter is not appearing.

Taking advantage of the matter not being in the list, the respondent is proceeding with the contempt.

Hence, this application by the appellant.

The facts so narrated above as we gather from Mr.Sarkar, learned senior advocate appearing for the appellant is quite unusual.

It is a serious allegation.

The matter was released on August 12, 2013 on the personal ground by one of the Hon’ble Judges of the earlier Bench.

The appellant applied for an assignment on August 22, 2013.

The present Bench is taking up the determination since after Puja Vacation.

The matter did not appear before this Bench despite being mentioned on December 20, 2013.

We have asked Mr.Sarkar to take the responsibility by someone on behalf of his advocate-on-record in support of the allegation as recorded above.

Mr.Sarkar is however, enable to do so in view of the fact, his present advocate-on-record has taken change on January 13, 2014.

We direct the Registrar, Original Side to make a thorough enquiry.

We would request the learned advocates for both sides to assist the learned Registrar, Original Side in the matter.

The report must be filed by Monday next.

(ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE, J.) (ARIJIT BANERJEE, J.) akb/


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