Calcutta High Court
Ici India Limited vs Ronald Ivor Salvadore Tellis & Ors on 11 April, 2019
Author: Soumen Sen
Bench: Soumen Sen, Ravi Krishan Kapur
ORDER
GA No. 832 of 2019
APOT No. 27 of 2019
With
CS No. 521 of 1999
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
ICI INDIA LIMITED
Versus
RONALD IVOR SALVADORE TELLIS & ORS.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN
The Hon'ble JUSTICE RAVI KRISHAN KAPUR
Date : 11th April, 2019.
Appearance:
Mr. Abhijit Chatterjee, Sr. Advocate
Mr. A. Basu, Advocate
Mr. B. Boral, Advocate
...for the applicant/appellant.
Mr. Soumyajit Ghosh, Advocate
Mr. Rohit Banerjee, Advocate
Mr. Samarjit Ghosh, Advocate
...for respondent No. 1.
By consent of parties, the appeal and the application are taken up for hearing and disposed of by this order.
The appellant is a defendant in the suit in which the plaintiff has prayed for a declaration that amendments of the 59 Trust instruments made on 1.1.1970 are void with a further declaration that the 1970 Trust instruments are also void. The plaintiff has claimed benefits of pension as a contributory member in accordance with the provision of the 59 Trust instruments - ICI India Staff Pension Fund incorporating amendments up to August 1959 along with a monetary claim.
2
During the course of hearing of the suit, on 25th February 2019, considering the nature of the claim and the counterclaim, the Learned Single Judge directed the defendant to come prepared with information and particulars that would be necessary to apply formula indicated in the order dated 24th August 2018. The order dated 24th August 2018 is not under challenge. The formula proposed by the Learned Single Judge was towards settlement of the dispute between the parties. Since the settlement had failed, the hearing of the matter commenced during which the said order was passed.
We have perused the order. Nothing is decided in the said order. The said order merely directs the defendants to come prepared with information and particulars which might be necessary to apply formula indicated in the order of 24th August 2018. We are unable to accept that the said direction virtually allows prayer (k) of the plaint. The Learned Single Judge has not appointed any Actuary by the order. The said issue has not been decided. The issue of appointment of Actuary has been kept open, which would be evident from the last sentence of the first fresh paragraph in the second page of the order, which reads:-
"Parties will also be heard on whether an Actuary can be appointed or a reference directed for ascertaining plaintiff's monetary claim."
The Learned Single Judge has also recorded in the earlier paragraph that so far the money claim is concerned there has to be 3 an exercise of ascertaining the amount in the event there is an adjudication that 70 Trust is not or cannot be by amendment made to 50 Trust as contended by appearing defendants.
We are of the view that the order is non-appellable as no issue between the parties has been decided by the said order.
Under such circumstances the appeal and the application stand dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
(SOUMEN SEN, J.) (RAVI KRISHAN KAPUR, J.) S. Kumar