Sai Surfactants Private Limited vs Ishika Fertilisers Limited on 1 April, 2025

0
39

Ms. Rajshree Kajaria, learned Counsel, is appearing for the plaintiff.

2. Mr. Shuvasish Sengupta, learned Counsel, is appearing for the

defendant.

3. Counsel for the plaintiff submits that writ of summons was duly

served upon the defendant but the defendant has neither entered

appearance nor has filed written statement. Accordingly, counsel

for the plaintiff prays for fixing the matter in the list of undefended

suit and direction for filling Judge’s Brief of documents.

4. Counsel for the defendant submits that he has got the instruction

and, on instruction, he submits that though writ of summons

alleged to have been served upon the defendant but the same was

served upon one Moushumi Chatterjee, who is not the employee of

the defendant company.

[ad_1]

Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here