Calcutta High Court
Kabari Pvt. Ltd vs Shrimati Ila Basu & Ors on 6 January, 2014
Author: Soumen Sen
Bench: Soumen Sen
ORDER SHEET
EOS No.18 of 1991
TA No.421 of 2007
With
TS No.167 of 1981
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
ORIGINAL SIDE
KABARI PVT. LTD.
Versus
SHRIMATI ILA BASU & ORS.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN
Date : 6th January, 2014.
Appearance:
Mr. R.N. Jhunjhunwala Adv.
. . .for the plaintiff.
Mr. Sayantan Basu, Adv.
Mr. Aditya Ganodia, Adv.
. . .for the defendant no.9.
Mr. Aniruddha Agarwala, Adv.
. . .for the defendant no.10.
The Court: The suit has appeared in the list at the instance of the parties who have suggested few corrections to be incorporated in the judgement and order dated 9th October, 2013.
The parties have filed copies of the judgement indicating such corrections. It appears from the corrections suggested by the parties that due to inadvertence certain typographical errors have crept in the order dated 9th October, 2013, which needs correction. 2
Accordingly the following corrections shall be incorporated in the judgement and order dated 9th October, 2013 :-
At page 11 of the judgement "4th September, 1978" shall be corrected as "21st September, 1978".
"10th August, 1981" mentioned at page 14 of the judgement shall be corrected as "10th August, 1951".
At page 15 in the second paragraph the date "26th June, 1953" shall be corrected as "26th June, 1954".
In the last paragraph at page 20 the year "1979" should be corrected as "1971" and 15th April, 1978" shall be corrected as "21st September, 1978".
At page 21, "15th April, 1978" shall be corrected as "21st September, 1978". At page 42 in the last part one sentence the word "plaintiff" shall be substituted as "defendants".
At page 43 at the top "31st September, 1978" shall be corrected as "21st September. 1978".
At page 48 in the last paragraph, in the last but full sentence from the bottom the word "dismissal" shall be corrected as "allowing". Accordingly, the sentence must read as "notwithstanding the allowing of the special leave petition......... ."
At page 61 in the first sentence after the words "steps were", the word "not" should be inserted and it should read as "A feeble attempt was made by the defendant that steps were not taken under Section 230A of the Income Tax Act, 1961".3
At page 65 in the last sentence "3rd July, 2012," shall be corrected as "16th June, 2011".
At page 66 in the last paragraph "24th July 2012" shall be corrected as "24th January 2012".
At page 78 the last sentence should read as follows: "Since this Court is inclined to accept the submission made by Mr. Chakravortii in this regard that the defendant are not entitled to protection under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, such plea taken by the defendant, in the opinion of the Court, is unmeritorious and not accepted".
At page 79 in the middle of the first paragraph after the words "mortgage is" the word "not" should be inserted and it should read as "......... mortgage is not an act.........".
At page 84 in the second sentence at the top instead of "December 1986," it should be "December 1996" and in the middle of the page the sentence commencing with "Accordingly ........." should be corrected and read as "Accordingly, it was contended that without adjustment of the said amount it cannot be contended that any rent has become due and payable."
At page 87 in the 4th line from the top the date of the agreement should be "21st September, 1978" instead and place of "4th September, 1978". In the last paragraph at the same page the sentence starting with "The said four several agreements" shall be corrected as "The said agreement".
At page 88 in the last paragraph "4th September, 1978" shall be corrected as "21st September, 1978".4
The appearance of the counsel recorded in the order dated 9th October, 2013 also requires correction. The appearances of counsel on behalf of the parties shall be recorded as follows :-
"Mr. Gautam Chakraborty, Sr. Advocate, Mr. P.K.Das, Sr. Advocate Mr. Bhaskar Sen, Sr. Advocate Mr. R.N.Jhunjhunwala, Advocate Mr. Deb Dutta Sen, Advocate and Mr. Saunak Mitra, Advocate for the plaintiff Mr. Surojit Nath Mitra, Sr. Advocate Mr. Sayantan Basu, Advocate Mr. Aditya Ginodia, Advocate for the defendant No.9 Mr. Arindam Sinha, Advocate Mr. S.K.Kundu, Advocate for the defendant No.10"
Let the aforesaid corrections be incorporated in the judgment and order dated 9th October, 2013 and the decree shall be drawn up after incorporation of the aforesaid corrections. The server copy shall also be corrected accordingly. The Department is directed to draw up the decree as expeditiously as possible after incorporating the aforesaid corrections. The Registrar, High Court, Original Side, is directed to take steps to correct the server copy.
In view of the aforesaid corrections, the Department shall issue a fresh certified copy to the parties. The parties are directed to give a fresh requisition and return the certified copies already obtained from the Department. Upon returning the said certified copies, the Department shall furnish and make over fresh certified copies to the parties.5
Registrar, High Court, Original Side, Department and all parties concerned are to act on a signed photocopy of this order on the usual undertakings.
(SOUMEN SEN, J.) sp/G