PARITOSH KUMAR MUKHERJEE, ALTAMAS KABIR
B. MOOKERJEE – Appellant
Versus
STATE BANK OF INDIA – Respondent
( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 8th 'october, 1985, passed by a Learned Single Judge of this Court on an application filed on behalf of the defendant No. 5 in Suit No. 296 of 1980, dismissing the said application, upon holding that the point sought to be raised by the defendant No. 5 could well be taken in his written statement and the Trial Court could decide the point, if urged, at the hearing of the suit.
( 2 ) CERTAIN interesting points of law have been raised in this appeal, which has been preferred by the defendant No. 5 in the suit, which makes it necessary for us to set out the material facts leading to the filing of the above-mentioned application in the suit.
( 3 ) THE defendant No. 1 in the suit, National Rubber Manufacturers Ltd. , is an existing company within the meaning of the Companies Act, 1956. The defendant No. 5 claims to be the Managing Director of the defendant No. 1 company.
( 4 ) THE defendant No. 1 owned two factories and/or undertakings, one of which is located at Tangra, Calcutta, and the other at Kalyani in the District of Nadia. By two notifications dated 23rd December 1977, and 10th February, 1978, re
Rustom Cavasjee Cooper v. Union of India
M/s.Hari Prasad Jayantilal and Co. v. V.S.Gupta, Income Tax Officer, Ahmedabad and Anr.
Krishnaprasad Jwaladutt Pilani v. Colaba Land and Mills Co. Ltd. and Ors.
Hindusthan Co-operative Insurance Society Ltds case
Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh, Nagpur v. The Model Mills, Nagpur and Anr.
Food Corporation of India Workers Union v. Food Corporation of India and Anr.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.