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.

Geetecee Engineers Constructers Vs. Alstom Power Services Ltd.

Geetecee Engineers Constructers vs Alstom Power Services Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided Jul 31, 2014
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1158882

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
FERA

Case Summary

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

FERA

Key legal issue
FERA

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Geetecee Engineers Constructers

Respondent

Alstom Power Services Ltd.

Excerpt

.....india for his work. in spite of service none appears on behalf of the defendant. the plaintiff suggests six issues for trial. i have considered the pleadings and the following issues are settled: “1. what are the terms and conditions of the contract agreed by and between the plaintiff and the defendant?.”2. whether the defendant failed to perform its obligations under the contract?.”3. whether the defendant was responsible for the delay in execution of the work by the plaintiff beyond the stipulated period?. 4.is the plaintiff entitled to a decree for a sum of rs.33,61,868/- as per particulars set out in paragraph 17 of the plaint?.”5. is the plaintiff entitled to interest as prayed for?.”6. what other reliefs is the plaintiff entitled to?. considering that the witness of the plaintiff has to leave india for his work, it would be just and proper to have the witness of the plaintiff examined by way of a commission. mr.kaushik chaudhury, advocate, bar library club, is appointed as the commissioner for such purpose. it is submitted on behalf of the plaintiff that the judge’s brief of documents is ready and that the same will be filed before the commissioner to facilitate early disposal of the commission. the advocate commissioner will proceed to hold the meeting on and from august 3, 2014 during court hours on a day to day basis. the advocate commissioner will not grant any adjournment to any of the parties on any ground whatsoever. the plaintiff will arrange for the venue of the commission and will intimate the venue of the commission to the commissioner and to the advocate-on-record for the defendant in writing by august 2, 2014. all costs, expenses and incidentals to the commission will be borne by the plaintiff at the firs.instance. the plaintiff will be entitled to add the cost of the commission to its claim. the commissioner will be entitled to a fixed remuneration of rs.34,000/- to be paid by the plaintiff at the firs.instance. the commissioner.....

Full Judgment

ORDER

SHEET GA No.2322 of 2014 WITH CS No.317 of 1997 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE GEETECEE ENGINEERS CONSTRUCTERS Versus ALSTOM POWER SERVICES LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 31st July, 2014.

Appearance : Mr.Rajarshi Dutta, Adv.Mr.U.Goswami, Adv.…for the plaintiff The Court: The application is for examining the witness of the plaintiff on commission since the witness of the plaintiff is a resident of United States of America and is required to leave India for his work.

In spite of service none appears on behalf of the defendant.

The plaintiff suggests six issues for trial.

I have considered the pleadings and the following issues are settled: “1.

What are the terms and conditions of the contract agreed by and between the plaintiff and the defendant?.”

2. Whether the defendant failed to perform its obligations under the contract?.”

3. Whether the defendant was responsible for the delay in execution of the work by the plaintiff beyond the stipulated period?.

4.Is the plaintiff entitled to a decree for a sum of Rs.33,61,868/- as per particulars set out in paragraph 17 of the plaint?.”

5. Is the plaintiff entitled to interest as prayed for?.”

6. What other reliefs is the plaintiff entitled to?.

Considering that the witness of the plaintiff has to leave India for his work, it would be just and proper to have the witness of the plaintiff examined by way of a commission.

Mr.Kaushik Chaudhury, Advocate, Bar Library Club, is appointed as the Commissioner for such purpose.

It is submitted on behalf of the plaintiff that the Judge’s Brief of Documents is ready and that the same will be filed before the Commissioner to facilitate early disposal of the Commission.

The Advocate Commissioner will proceed to hold the meeting on and from August 3, 2014 during Court hours on a day to day basis.

The Advocate Commissioner will not grant any adjournment to any of the parties on any ground whatsoever.

The plaintiff will arrange for the venue of the commission and will intimate the venue of the commission to the Commissioner and to the advocate-on-record for the defendant in writing by August 2, 2014.

All costs, expenses and incidentals to the commission will be borne by the plaintiff at the fiRs.instance.

The plaintiff will be entitled to add the cost of the commission to its claim.

The Commissioner will be entitled to a fixed remuneration of Rs.34,000/- to be paid by the plaintiff at the fiRs.instance.

The Commissioner will file his report on August 13, 2014.

GA No.2322 of 2014 is disposed of.

No order as to costs.

C.S.No.317 of 1997 will appear on August 13, 2014.

(DEBANGSU BASAK, J.) akb/

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial