Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court

Ronald Ivor Salvadore Tellis vs Ici India Management Staff Pension Fund on 25 February, 2019

Author: Arindam Sinha

Bench: Arindam Sinha

                             CS 521 of 1999

                     IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

                  Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction

                             ORIGINAL SIDE




                      RONALD IVOR SALVADORE TELLIS
                                 Versus
                ICI INDIA MANAGEMENT STAFF PENSION FUND
                                   .........

BEFORE:

The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 25th February, 2019.
Mr. D. Ghosh, SR. Adv., Mr. S. Ghosh, adv...for plaintiff.
Mr. Abhhijit Chatterjee, Sr. Adv., Mr. B. Boral, adv...for defendant.
The Court : Court on having been informed that parties have failed to settle, commenced hearing submissions made by Mr. Ghosh, learned senior advocate appearing on behalf of plaintiff, as recorded in order dated 24th August, 2018. Then Mr. Ghosh was interrupted and Court indicated a formula for a second attempt at settlement. That second attempt also failed.
Plaintiff has claimed declaration that amendments to 59 Trust made on 1st January, 1970 are void and bad in law and secondly, the 70 Trust is also void and bad in law. Further and other claims, relating to working of 59 Trust in the period it stood amended to have become the 70 Trust as well as, inter alia, money decree along with interest have also been made.

By claim (k), Mr. Ghosh points out, plaintiff has asked for appointment of an Actuary to conduct investigation and to recommend the amount of pension payable to plaintiff as a contributory member of 59 Trust.

Facts that are undisputed were recorded in said order dated 24th August, 2018. Adjudication of claims of plaintiff, in particular the main claim regarding amendment, is an interpretation of 59 Trust, which provides for amendment to it, whether thereby there was amendment to have amended or new 70 Trust? So far as money claim is concerned, there has to be an exercise of ascertaining the amount in event there is adjudication that 70 Trust is not or cannot be by amendment made to 50 Trust, as contended by appearing defendants.

Appearing defendants might come prepared with information and particulars that would be necessary to apply formula indicated in order dated 24th August, 2018. Parties will also be heard on whether an Actuary can be appointed or a reference directed for ascertaining plaintiff's monetary claim.

List on 18th March, 2019 marked at 3.30 p.m. (ARINDAM SINHA, J.) pkd.