Laxmi Pat Surana vs Pantaloon Retail India Ltd. & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 205 Cal/2

                                      AP/380/2017

                            IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                        Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction
                                    ORIGINAL SIDE


                                         LAXMI PAT SURANA

                                             -Versus-

                                         PANTALOON RETAIL INDIA LTD. & ORS.


   BEFORE:
   The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA
   Date : 24th February, 2021.

   (Via Video Conference)

                                                                        Appearance:
                                                                Mr. Sakya Sen, Adv.
                                                        Mr. Sunil Kumar Gupta, Adv.
                                                             Mr. Arindam Paul, Adv.
                                                                 ...for petitioner.

                                                         Mr. S.K. Kapoor, Sr.   Adv.
                                                     Mr. Ranjan Bachawat, Sr.   Adv.
                                                            Mr. Arindam Guha,   Adv.
                                                           Mr. Debnath Ghosh,   Adv.
                                                      Mr. Shuvasish Sengupta,   Adv.
                                                             Ms. Richa Goyal,   Adv.
                                                      ...for respondent nos.1   & 4.

Mr. Ranjan Deb, Sr. Adv.

...for respondent nos.2 & 3.

The Court : Mr. Deb, learned senior advocate appears on

behalf of respondent nos.2 and 3. He is in reply.

He draws attention to paragraph 74 of award dated 19th

May, 2016 in concluded reference between the parties. The

paragraph is reproduced below:

"74. It was only at very late stage or proceeding viz. rd at 53 sitting held on 11th March, 2015, Mr. Surana proceeded to

claim much larger sum on each count on the basis that the Respondents withheld all such sub-licence agreements from the Claimant until recently when they disclosed only 3 of such sub- licenses. Mr. Surana prayed for amendment of his claim, which after considering the objection of Counsel, I was reluctant to grant to avoid further prolongation of the proceeding. I opined that since documents were disclosed by the Respondents and who otherwise knew what was issued at stake, no possible objection could be made if the Claimant seeks to modify his claims on these two counts."

He submits, the amendment sought was rejected. In this

context he relies on judgment dated 3rd May, 1996 of a learned

Single Judge in the High Court of Gujarat in Govindbhai Gelabhai

Patel vs. Madhabhai Prabhudas Patel and Ors. He concludes his

submission.

On adjourned date respondent nos.1 and 4 will be heard in

reply.

List next Wednesday (3rd March, 2021.)

(ARINDAM SINHA, J.)

A/s.