Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/3 vs M/S. Birla Corporation Ltd on 25 April, 2022
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010208202016
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : CRP/403/2016
GOVERDHAN PRASAD ATAL and ANR.
S/O LT. MADAN LAL ATAL
2: M/S ATAL STORES
A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REGD. UNDER THE INDIAN PARTNERSHIP ACT
1932 REP. BY SRI GOVERDHAN PRASAD ATAL
ONE OF ITS PARTNERS
BOTH ARE HAVING THEIR OFFICE AT K.K. GOHAI COMPLEX
S.K. BARUAH ROAD
RUKMINI NAGAR
P.O. GHY-6
AND PERMANENT R/O SEUNI ALI
A.T. ROAD
P.O. JORHAT
ASSA
VERSUS
M/S. BIRLA CORPORATION LTD.
FORMERLY NAMED AS BIRLA JUTE and INDUSTRIES LTD., HAVING ITS
REGD. OFFICE AT BIRLA BUILDING 9/1, R.N. MUKHERJEE ROAD,
KOLKATA AND BRANCH OFFICE/ MANUFACTURING UNIT NAMED AS
SATNA CEMENT WORKS, P.O. BIRLA VIKASH, DIST- SATNA, MADHYA
PRADESH
Advocate for the Petitioner : MS.J TRIPATHI
Advocate for the Respondent : MR.B D DEKA
Page No.# 2/3
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA
ORDER
25-04-2022
This application, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, has been made
challenging the order dated 17-08-2016, passed by the learned Civil Judge No.
2, Kamrup (M), Guwahati, in Misc. J. Case No. 355 of 2016, arising out of Title
Suit No. 159 of 2014.
The order impugned in this petition, was passed on an application under Order
VI, Rule 17 of the CPC, filed by the plaintiffs/petitioners praying for amendment
of the plaint in the aforesaid suit incorporating the prayer for recovery of Rs.1
Crore 80 Lakhs from the defendant/respondent.
The ground for seeking to incorporate the above relief in the plaint is that the
defendant/respondent has fraudulently obtained the judgment in his favour in a
case initiated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. The facts
upon which the final judgment passed in the aforesaid case under the NI Act
are relevant in the suit also.
Heard Mr. J.C. Gaur, learned counsel representing the plaintiffs/petitioners and
Mr. H.K. Deka, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. B. Deka, learned counsel
representing the respondent.
This Court has noticed that the allegation of fraudulents obtaining of the order
in favour of the defendant/respondent was for recovery of the amount of Rs.1
Crore and 80 Lakhs in the aforesaid case under the NI Act. The matter went up
to the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court while upholding
the judgment, gave direction to the plaintiff/petitioner to deposit the amount to
the Court which the plaintiff/petitioner complied with.
Page No.# 3/3
The suit involved in this application was filed prior to the deposit of the
aforesaid amount in accordance with the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court. Therefore, the plaintiff/petitioner has sought to add a prayer for
additional relief of recovery of the amount so deposited in accordance with the
order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In the considered view of this Court, since
the issue in relation to the aforesaid additional relief as prayed for has cropped
up after the suit was filed and after the Hon'ble Supreme Court ordered to
deposit the amount, in the considered view of this Court, the prayer deserves to
be granted. That apart, this Court has noticed that in view of the new facts, the
structure of the suit will not be changed to the prejudice of the
defendant/respondent, if the prayer is allowed.
That being so, the prayer is allowed.
The learned Court below shall make endeavour to dispose of this case within a
specific time to be fixed by itself since the matter is pending for long.
With the above observation and direction this petition stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
