Calcutta High Court
Tanaya Industries Pvt. Ltd vs Gcm 337 Seogu-Ri & Ors on 8 February, 2024
OCD-9
ORDER SHEET
CS/100/2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
[Commercial Division]
TANAYA INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.
-Versus-
GCM 337 SEOGU-RI & ORS.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE KRISHNA RAO
Date : February 8, 2024.
Appearance:
Mrs. Suchismita Ghosh Chatterjee, Adv.
Mr. Malay K. Seal, Adv.
... for the plaintiff
Ms. Neelina Chatterjee, Adv.
Mr. Suvodeep Chakraborty, Adv.
... for the defendant nos. 1 and 2.
The Court: Mrs. Suchismita Ghosh Chatterjee, learned counsel, is
appearing for the plaintiff. Mr. Suvodeep Chakraborty, learned counsel, is
appearing for the defendants.
A common suggested issues has been filed by the plaintiff and the
defendants. Let the same be kept with the record.
After hearing the learned counsel for the plaintiff and the
defendants and on perusal of the plaint, the written statement along with the
2
counterclaim and the common suggested issues, the following issues are
framed : -
ISSUES
1.Whether the plaintiff had represented to the defendants that PE Tubes machines which were to be manufactured by the Defendants for being supplied to the plaintiff, were to be customized with special specifications to be supplied by the plaintiff, as alleged in paragraph 5(d) of the written statement filed by the defendant Nos. 1 and 2?
2. Whether the agreement between the parties as pleaded in paragraph 8 of the plaint was concluded at Kolkata?
3. Whether there was breach of the contract dated December 21, 2012? If so, who is responsible for such breach?
4. Is the plaintiff entitled to recover the sum of US $ 526819.18 or its equivalent in Indian currency on conversion on the date of payment?
5. To what other relief or reliefs the plaintiff is entitled?
6. Was any attempt made by the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 to sell the machinery in terms of the order dated 21st December, 2015 which was also confirmed by the order dated 10th May, 2016?
3
7. Whether the counter-claim raised by the defendant nos. 1 and 2 in paragraphs 28 and 29 of the written statement is maintainable?
8. Did the defendant suffer any damage entitling it to claim a sum of Rs.7,08,10,132/- equivalent to US $ 1059134.50 or any sum as a counter claim against the plaintiff? The plaintiff is directed to file the Judge's Brief of Documents after serving the copy to the learned counsel for the defendants. The plaintiff is also directed to file examination in chief of the plaintiff on affidavit after serving copy to the learned counsel for the defendants.
List the matter on 5th April, 2024 at 3:00 p.m. for witness action of the plaintiff.
(KRISHNA RAO, J.) RS