Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Calcutta High Court

Narendra Kumar Berlia vs Om Prakash Berlia & Ors on 17 January, 2018

Author: Sahidullah Munshi

Bench: Sahidullah Munshi

ORDER SHEET

                            CS No. 79 of 2011
                    IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                     Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction
                              ORIGINAL SIDE


                                   NARENDRA KUMAR BERLIA
                                           Versus
                                   OM PRAKASH BERLIA & ORS.

  BEFORE:

  The Hon'ble JUSTICE SAHIDULLAH MUNSHI

Date : 17th January, 2018.

Mr. Abhrajit Mitra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Jishnu Chowdhury, Adv. Mr. Sarbopriya Mukherjee, Adv.

...for the plaintiff Mr. Samit Talukdar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Satadip Bhattacharya, Adv. Mr. S.R. Kakrania, Adv. Mr. Sanjib Seni, Adv.

Ms. Ritika Saraf, Adv.

...for defendant nos. 1,2,9 & 10 Mr. D. Adhikari, Mr. A. Mukherjee, Advs.

...for defendant nos. 3,5 & 16 Mr. S. Huda, Mr. T. Aich, Advs.

...for defendant no. 6 Mr. Chayan Gupta, Mr. A.K. Dey, Advs.

...for defendant nos. 7 & 14 Mr. Pramit Bag, Adv.

...for defendant nos. 21 & 22 The Court : After hearing the parties and considering of the respective suggested issues, the following issues are settled :

i) Whether the instant suit is maintainable in law and whether the Hon'ble Court has got territorial jurisdiction to try the same ?

ii) Whether the shares of companies, being the defendant nos. 6 to 18, 21 and 22 are assets and properties of the Berlia family as claimed by the plaintiff in paragraph 77 of the plaint ?

iii) Whether immovable properties, more fully described in annexure 'R' to the plaint are joint family properties of the Berlia family ?

iv) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to any decree for partition in respect of suit properties ?

v) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to any perpetual injunction in respect of the assets or the properties in suit ?

vi) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to any other reliefs as claimed in the plaint ?

vii) Whether the plaintiff has any cause of action against the defendant, in particular defendant nos. 1 and 2 ?

viii) Whether the instant suit is bad for mis-joinder of parties and non-joinder of necessary parties ?

ix) Whether the claims of the plaintiff in relation to the shareholding in the defendant no. 6 is barred under Companies Act, 1956 and also the claim of the plaintiff is hit by the provisions of Benami Transaction Prohibition Act, 1988 ?

x) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to any declaration as per prayer (a) in the plaintiff against the defendant ?

xi) Can the defendant no. 21 be treated as part of the joint family state of the Berlia family ?

Matter to appear in the monthly list of April, 2018.

(SAHIDULLAH MUNSHI, J.) TR/