Calcutta High Court
Angelo Brothers Ltd.(In Liquidation) & ... vs Unknown on 16 July, 2015
Author: Aniruddha Bose
Bench: Aniruddha Bose
ORDER SHEET SHEET NO.1
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Original Jurisdiction
CA No.578 of 2012
With
CP No. 90 of 1983
IN THE MATTER OF:-
ANGELO BROTHERS LTD.(IN LIQUIDATION) & ORS.
AND
IN THE MATTER OF:-
HUNGERFORT INVESTMENT TRUST LIMITED
Versus
THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR, HIGH COURT, CALCUTTA.
CA No.401 of 2013
CA No.342 of 1998
CA No.431 of 2012
CP No.90 of 1983
IN THE MATTER OF:-
ANGELO BROTHERS LTD.(IN LIQUIDATION) & ORS.
AND
IN THE MATTER OF:-
NAWDEEP SINGH
Versus
THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR, HIGH COURT, CALCUTTA.
CA No.119 of 2015
CP No.90 of 1983
IN THE MATTER OF:-
ANGELO BROS LTD.(IN LIQUIDATION) & ORS.
AND
ANGELO BROTHERS LTD.
CA No.136 of 2015
CP No.90 of 1983
IN THE MATTER OF:-
ANGELO BROS LTD.(IN LIQUIDATION) & ORS.
VS
THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR, HIGH COURT, CALCUTTA.
CA No.232 of 2015
CP No.90 of 1983
CA No.136 of 2015
IN THE MATTER OF:-
ANGELO BROS LTD.(IN LIQUIDATION) & ORS.
AND
ANGELO BROTHERS LTD.
2
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE
Date : 16th July, 2015.
Appearance:-
Mr. Deepak Khosla, Advocate appears.
Mr.Nirmalya Dasgupta, Advocate.
Mr.R.L. Mitra, Advocate.
... for Martin Burn Ltd.
Mr. Rajiv Lall, Advocate.
Mr.S.C.Prasad, Advocate.
..for the Official Liquidator.
Mr. M.C.Ghosh, Advocate.
Mr. Vineet Tibrewal, Advocate.
...for Mr. P.K. Singhania.
The Court:-Today, when these matters were called on, objection has been taken on behalf of Martin Burn Ltd. that Mr. Khosla cannot represent his client in the absence of there being an Advocate-on-record. In my order yesterday, I had given leave to Mr. Khosla's client to ensure that Vakalatnama is filed on their behalf by today, i.e. 16th July, 2015.
In such circumstances, the timeframe prescribed for filing Vakalatnama has not lapsed. But I wanted to ascertain from Mr. Khosla, who was the Advocate-on-record instructing him and he submitted that Kinjal Kumar Boral and Raj Kumar Gupta would be filing such Vakalatnama. I had enquired from Kinjal Kumar Boral, upon making request to him to appear before this Court whether he was representing the client of Mr. Khosla or not. He submitted that he was not representing the client of Mr. Khosla.3
From the records available with the Court, I find that there is a subsisting Vakalatnama executed in favour of Sujit Basu, Advocate dated 3rd April, 1995. This Vakalatnama has been signed by Nirmaljit Singh Hoon as Chairman of Angelo Brothers Ltd. It also appears from endorsement made on that Vakalatnama that the same was filed upon obtaining leave of the Court. The date of such endorsement is 18th April, 1995. It is brought to the notice of this Court by Mr.Boral, who is present in Court today that Sujit Basu has passed away. In fact, the application being CA No.431 of 2012 has been taken out by Mr.Hoon in person. Mr. Khosla, in course of hearing, had submitted that he had obtained response from the designated officer of this Court in relation to a query under the Right to Information Act, 2005 and such response revealed that Mr. Boral was representing the applicant. Mr. Boral however submitted to this Court that he was not representing Mr. Hoon. There is no disclosure in the said reply, which was shown to me by Mr. Khosla, as to who was the applicant whom Mr. Boral represented. The year in which the Vakalatnama was filed, as it appears from the reply to the query, is 1991. The Vakalatnama filed by Mr. Sujit Basu being of a later date, on his death that Vakalatnama stood invalidated. In such circumstances, Mr. Khosla submitted that Raj Kumar Gupta would be filing Vakalatnama in course of the day.
There are several applications on record with the back sheet of Raj Kumar Gupta but it was brought to my notice earlier by the Department 4 that there is no Vakalatnama available with the records of Raj Kumar Gupta as yet. On the basis of such undertaking, which still subsists, I choose to proceed with further hearing of the applications listed today. Let the file containing Vakalatnama of the learned Advocates appearing for the different parties be kept in safe custody of the learned Registrar, Original Side.
Later :- All the records pertaining to CP No. 90 of 1983 have been produced before this Court in pursuance of direction of this Court and at present these records are in custody of the Court. Mr. Khosla wants photocopies of certain documents from the records of the Official Liquidator. Mr. Lall, learned Counsel for the Official Liquidator has not raised any objection in making these photocopies available. Under such circumstances, I give liberty to Mr. Khosla to make available a list containing the description of the documents for which he seeks certified copies to Mr. Lall. Thereafter the copies thereof shall be made available to Mr. Khosla expeditiously. For this purpose, the Official Liquidator or his representative shall be entitled to access the records of CP No.90 of 1983 and make photocopies thereof in the office of the Official Liquidator.
Let these matters appear on 22nd July,2015 at 12 noon.
(ANIRUDDHA BOSE, J.) nm/S.Chandra A.R.(C.R.)