pronouncement of judgment, a
Division Bench decision of this Court in NICCO Corporation Ltd. vs. Cable
Corporation of India & ors., reported ... respondent was illegally allowed to participate. He relied
on the decisions in NICCO (supra), B.L. Sreedhar vs. K.M. Munireddy (dead) &
ors., reported
tenders containing offers were to be communicated to EIL at New Delhi. NICCO, having its registered office in Calcutta, read and became aware ... tenders were scrutinized by EIL at New Delhi. EIL rejected the NICCO's bid on the ground that it did not fulfil the requisite
territories. In
order to confer jurisdiction on the High Court of Calcutta, NICCO must
show that at least a part of the cause of action ... From the facts pleaded in the writ petition, it is clear that NICCO
invoked the jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court on the plea that
laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in NICCO (supra)
squarely applies in a situation of the present nature.
The conclusion is inescapable ... Learned Single Judge has wrongly applied the ratio in the
case of NICCO Corporation Ltd. vs. Cable Corporation Ltd. [2008 (1) CHN 567]. The
respondents
Siemens Ltd. vs Hscc (India) Ltd. And Ors. on 6 March, 2007
Equivalent citations: 2007
This petitioner
relies on a judgment reported at 2008 (1) CHN 567 ( Nicco Corporation Ltd. v.
Cable Corporation of India Ltd. ) and another reported
M/S.Sun Tv Network Ltd vs Union Of India on 14 June, 2016
Author
Montecarlo Limited , reported in 2022 SCC OnLine
SC 111;
(viii) NICCO Corporation Ltd. Vs. Cable Corporation
of India Limited, reported
territories. In order to confer jurisdiction on the High Court of Calcutta, NICCO must show that at least a part of the cause of action
referred to a judgment reported at (2008) 1
CHN (Cal) 567 ( NICCO Corporation Limited v. Cable Corporation of India Limited )
for its recognition
