Triseva Pariwahan Services Ltd. Vs. M/S. Phoenix Yule Ltd. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1060717
CourtKolkata High Court
Decided OnFeb-26-2013
JudgeSOUMEN SEN
AppellantTriseva Pariwahan Services Ltd.
RespondentM/S. Phoenix Yule Ltd.
Excerpt:
order sheet ga no.598 of 2013 cs no.276 of 2004 in the high court at calcutta ordinary original civil jurisdiction triseva pariwahan services ltd.versus m/s.phoenix yule ltd.before: the hon'ble justice soumen sen date:26. h february, 2013. appearance: ms.s.s. bose, advocates ...for the defendant/petitioner mr.m.chandra with mr.souveek roy, advocates ...for the plaintiff/respondent the conduct of the defendant/applicant is deplorable. it appears that on earlier occasion, an ex parte decree was passed which was recalled by an order dated 18th september 2007 upon the petitioner paying cost assessed at 300 gms.the written statement, although served upon the plaintiff, was not filed in the department. the defendant conducting the litigation. was extremely lackadaisical in the defendant has failed to disclose documents in spite of an order passed on 10th december 2007. it appears that by the order dated 19th august 2005, the defence of the defendant was struck off in view of defendant to file the affidavit of documents. the failure of the this clearly gives an impression that the defendant was making all attempts to delay the hearing of the suit. in fact, today, the suit cannot be proceeded in view of the application filed by the defendant for recalling of the order dated 19th august 2009 by which its defence was struck off. the said application was taken out only on 22nd february 2013 on grounds which are far from satisfactory. however, having regard to the fact that the defendant has appeared and is ready with the documents, the defendant is permitted to file such affidavit of documents within one week from date upon payment of cost assessed at 1000 gms.to be paid by the defendant to the plaintiff within two days from date, failing which the order dated 19th august 2009 shall revive. learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that there is no explanation, far less reasonable, which would demonstrate that the defendant was diligent in proceeding with the suit. this court agrees with such submission. however, for the reasons recorded hereinabove and with a view to avoid all future controversies, as and by way of last chance, the defendant is permitted to disclose such documents within the time stipulated in this order. upon defendant cost to being file the paid, the written department statement and shall permit the the affidavit of documents. let this matter appear after one week. ga no.598 of 2013 is disposed of. department and all parties concerned are to act on a signed photocopy of this order on the usual undertakings. (soumen sen, j.) s. kumar a.r.(c.r.)
Judgment:

ORDER

SHEET GA No.598 of 2013 CS No.276 of 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction TRISEVA PARIWAHAN SERVICES LTD.Versus M/S.PHOENIX YULE LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date:

26. h February, 2013.

Appearance: Ms.S.S.

Bose, Advocates ...for the defendant/petitioner Mr.M.Chandra with Mr.Souveek Roy, Advocates ...for the plaintiff/respondent The conduct of the defendant/applicant is deplorable.

It appears that on earlier occasion, an ex parte decree was passed which was recalled by an order dated 18th September 2007 upon the petitioner paying cost assessed at 300 GMs.The written statement, although served upon the plaintiff, was not filed in the department.

The defendant conducting the litigation.

was extremely lackadaisical in The defendant has failed to disclose documents in spite of an order passed on 10th December 2007.

It appears that by the order dated 19th August 2005, the defence of the defendant was struck off in view of defendant to file the affidavit of documents.

the failure of the This clearly gives an impression that the defendant was making all attempts to delay the hearing of the suit.

In fact, today, the suit cannot be proceeded in view of the application filed by the defendant for recalling of the order dated 19th August 2009 by which its defence was struck off.

The said application was taken out only on 22nd February 2013 on grounds which are far from satisfactory.

However, having regard to the fact that the defendant has appeared and is ready with the documents, the defendant is permitted to file such affidavit of documents within one week from date upon payment of cost assessed at 1000 GMs.to be paid by the defendant to the plaintiff within two days from date, failing which the order dated 19th August 2009 shall revive.

Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that there is no explanation, far less reasonable, which would demonstrate that the defendant was diligent in proceeding with the suit.

This court agrees with such submission.

However, for the reasons recorded hereinabove and with a view to avoid all future controversies, as and by way of last chance, the defendant is permitted to disclose such documents within the time stipulated in this order.

Upon defendant cost to being file the paid, the written department statement and shall permit the the affidavit of documents.

Let this matter appear after one week.

GA No.598 of 2013 is disposed of.

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

(SOUMEN SEN, J.) S.

Kumar A.R.(C.R.)