SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1998 Supreme(Cal) 438

A.N.RAY, D.P.KUNDU
Diabari Tea Co Ltd – Appellant
Versus
Dooars Assam Union Tea Co Ltd – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. THIS is an appeal from a judgment and order dated 23rd June, 1993.

2. THE entire text of that is set out in an order passed at the interlocutory stage of this appeal on an application made by Mr. Promothownath Chatterjee's clients for addition of his clients as parties. Some facts relating to the company and its shareholders and directors are also set out there.

It is mentioned there, and we also mention it here, because it is a fact of very great importance, that although it is recorded in the books of this Court on 23.6.93 that there is a judgment apart from the order that is available, yet in fact no such judgment is available.

3. NO such judgment to repeat is available.

4. IT is recorded in the order "court delivers written judgment". We know of the Court delivering judgment and also of handing over of the written judgment to the Court Officer but we are not aware of delivering written judgment being recorded in an order.

It is also stated in the order " (for details see the original judgment)". The meaning of the phrase original judgment is, mildly speaking, a little unclear. Since there is no judgment original or otherwise arid there are no details available from











































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top