T.K. Engineering Consortium Private Ltd. and 5 Ors v. Techcon Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd

PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010110122023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oCRP/50/2023o T.K.oENGINEERINGoCONSORTIUMoPRIVATEoLTD.oANDo5oORS.o AoCOMPANYoHAVINGoITSoREGD.oOFFICEoAToMODELoVILLAGE,oP.O.oANDoP.S. NAHARLAGUN,oDIST.-oPAPUMPARE,oPI-o791110,oARUNACHALoPRADESHo EMAIL.ID-oTKECONLTD@GMAIL.COM,oMOB.oNO-o9436041370 2:oRATUoTECHI oMANAGINGoDIRECTORoOFoPETITIONERoNO.o1 oR/O-oMODELoVILLAGE oP.O.oANDoP.S.oNAHARLAGUN oDIST.-oPAPUMPARE oPIN-o791110 oARUNACHALoPRADESHoEMAIL.oID-oTK.RATUTECHI@GMAIL.COMoMOB.o NO.o9436041370 3:oTECHIoTARA oDIRECTORoOFoPETITIONERoNO.o1 oR/O-oMODELoVILLAGE oP.O.oANDoP.S.oNAHARLAGUN oDIST.-oPAPUMPARE oPIN-o791110 oARUNACHALoPRADESHoEMAIL.oID-oTECHITARA1985@GMAIL.COMoMOB.o NO.o8413833552 4:o(MRS)oTECHIoJULLY oDIRECTORoOFoPETITIONERoNO.o1 oR/O-oMODELoVILLAGE oP.O.oANDoP.S.oNAHARLAGUN oDIST.-oPAPUMPARE oPIN-o791110 oARUNACHALoPRADESHoEMAIL.oID-oMD@TKEECON.COMoMOB.oNO.o 9436041370 5:oPRADIPoKUMARoROY oVICEoPRESIDENToOFoPETITIONERoNO.o1 PageoNo.#o2/4 oR/O-oFLAToNO.o204 oBLOCK-A3 oGAMESoVILLAGE oBELTOLA oP.S.oBASISTHA oPIN-o791110 oEMAIL.oID-oPKROY@TKCON.COMoMOB.oNO.o8259020300 6:oKISHOREoKUMARoSENAPATI oCHIEFoFINANCIALoOFFICERoOFoPETITIONERoNO.o1 oR/O-oMODELoVILLAGE oP.O.oANDoP.S.oNAHARLAGUN oDIST.-oPAPUMPARE oPIN-o791110 oARUNACHALoPRADESHoEMAIL.oID-oTKEECON@GMAIL.COMoMOB.oNO.o 779942588o VERSUSo TECHCONoINFRASTRUCTUREoPVT.oLTD.o AoCOMPANYoWITHINoTHEoMEANINGoOFoCOMPANIESoACT,o2013oHAVINGo ITSoLOCALoPRINCIPALoOFFICEoAToASSAMoTRUNKoROAD,oTOKOBARI,oOPP.o MAHAVIRoBHAWAN,oDISTRICToKAMRUPo(M),oGUWAHATI-o781001,oANDoITSo REGD.oOFFICEoAToP-27,oPRINCEPoSTREET,o2NDoFLOOR,oP.S.oBOWBAZAR,o KOLKATA-o700072oHAVINGoEMAILoID-oTECHCONINFRA@GMAIL.COM,o MOB.oNO-o9831089488 For;the;Petitioner(s);;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;:;Mr.;D.;Mozumdar,;Sr.;Advocate ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo For;the;Respondent(s);;;;;;;;;;;;;;:;Mr.;O.;P.;Bhati,;Advocate; oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo BEFORE HONOURABLEoMR.oJUSTICEoDEVASHISoBARUAH ORDERo Dateo:oo05.03.2024 o

1.;;;; The; instant ; proceedings; has; been; filed; challenging; the ;order; dated

09.05.2023;passed;by;the;learned;Court;of;the;Civil;Judge;No.2,;Kamrup;(M);at Page No.# 3/4 Guwahati whereby the application under Order VII Rule 11 (a) and (d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short "the Code") was rejected.

¶2This Court has duly perused the application which has been filed under Order VII Rule 11 (a) and (d) of the Code and primarily, a perusal of the said application shows that the basic ground which was taken is that the Court before whom the suit was filed did not have the territorial jurisdiction. The question of territorial jurisdiction in the opinion of this Court cannot be decided in a proceedings under Order VII Rule 11 (a) and (d) of the Code inasmuch the same may require going into evidence and more particularly in a case like the present one where it has been categorically shown in the plaint that the defendants are either residents or have the principal place of business within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court at Guwahati. Taking into account that the scope of a proceedings for rejection of a plaint is solely to be decided on a perusal of the contents of the plaint and nothing else, in the opinion of this Court, in the present facts, the application for rejection of plaint was totally misconceived.

¶3It is also well settled principle of law that when an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code is taken, the only document which requires to be looked into is the plaint and as to whether from the said plaint it discloses a cause of action or for the matter, whether from a perusal of the plaint, the plaint appears to be barred by provisions of law. Under such circumstances, this Court having perused the impugned order dated 09.05.2023 finds no illegality or an error of jurisdiction in passing the impugned order for which it is the opinion of this Court that this is not a fit case for exercising the jurisdiction under Section 115 of the Code or for that matter, under Article 227 of the Constitution.

¶4The stay order dated 23.05.2023 in the instant proceedings stands vacated Page No.# 4/4 and taking into account that the parties are duly represented before this Court, this Court directs both the parties to appear before the Trial Court on

27.03.2024.

¶5Before parting with the records, this Court however finds it relevant to observe that if the Petitioners herein who are the defendants in the suit wishes to raise the question of territorial jurisdiction, the same can be very well framed as an issue in the suit or for that matter, a preliminary issue, if no facts are disputed. This Court further finds it relevant to observe that the order dated

09.05.2023 rejecting the application for rejection of plaint is an order which would be solely confined to an adjudication of a proceedings under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code and the findings thereof shall not therefore influence the learned Trial Court while deciding the issue of territorial jurisdiction, if so raised in the suit.

¶6With above observations and directions, the instant proceedings stands disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant