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

2015 Supreme(Cal) 703

DEBI PROSAD DEY
Ajit Kumar Saha – Appellant
Versus
Sampa Saha – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Tanmoy Mukherjee, Mr. Subrata Ray

JUDGMENT :

Debi Prosad Dey, J.

This application under Section 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against order No.230 dated 09.03.2015 passed by learned Judge, Small Causes Court, Sealdah in title suit No.117 of 1991 wherein and whereby learned Judge rejected the plant of the suit under Order 7 Rule 11(D)of Code of Civil Procedure.

2. Pursuant to the direction given by Hon’ble Justice Harish Tandon the petitioner has served notice upon the opposite parties as well as upon the learned Advocate representing them in the trial Court. The affidavit of service has been filed in the Court and the same be kept with the record.

3. Learned Advocate Subrata Ray appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that learned Judge has erroneously quoted the sections of Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996 instead of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1940 and thereby completely misdirected himself in deciding the application under Section 20 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1940. It is further submitted that learned Judge erroneously quoted the sections of 1996 Act and thereby under a wrong impression rejected the plaint of the petitioner on the ground that learned Judge is n










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