- (1.) This is an application made by S.B. Foundry Ltd. under clause 13 of the Letters Patent as also under S.24 of the Code of Civil Procedure in the Extraordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction of this Court for orders that the Title Suit No. 25 of 1980 (Shree Gopi Kissen Steel Works Pvt. Ltd. and another v. S. B. Foundry Ltd. and others) pending before the Learned 10th Subordinate Judge at Alipore and Miscellaneous Appeal No. 251 of 1981 (Shree Gopi Kissen Steel Works Pvt. Ltd. and another v. S. B. Foundry Ltd. and others) pending in the Learned 14th Additional District Judge at Alipore and all proceedings thereunder should be removed and/or transferred to this Hon"ble Court and be heard, tried and determined by this Hon"ble Court in its Extraordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction.
(2.) Mr. Dipak Basu for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is being harassed by inordinate delay in hearing of the said appeal and from 1981 till 1984 the petitioner could not get the appeal heard and as such for the interest of justice as well as for the balance of convenience this suit as well as the appeal (preferred from an interlocutory order passed in connection with this suit) should be transferred to this Court. Mr. Basu has drawn my pointed attention to the fact how adjournment after adjournment has been made so far the said Miscellaneous Appeal No. 251 of 1981 is concerned by the said Court. He has also argued that both for the sake of balance of convenience as also for the ends of justice the said appeal along with the said suit should be transferred to this Court. He has contended that balance of convenience is in favour of transfer inasmuch as the Advocates-on-Records are all practising in High Court, the registered office of the company and the parties are within the jurisdiction of this Court and the persons who will depose are available more easily if the suit is heard in this Court and as such the suit should be transferred. So far as the appeal is concerned he submits the very fact that so many adjournments have been allowed warrants transfer of the appeal too. Mr. Basu has drawn my attention to the affidavit in opposition affirmed by Shyam Sunder Kajaria where in paragraphs 63, 65(v), 66 and 72 of the said affidavit-in-opposition affirmed by one Sham Sunder Kajaria has stated that it is desirable that the proceedings pending before the 14th Additional District Judge at Alipore and also the pending suit before the 10th Subordinate Judge at Alipore be transferred to this Hon"ble Court. On the basis of the said affidavit Mr. Basu argued that the provisions of Clause 13 of the Letters Patent have been attracted because the parties have agreed to the effect of such transfer which is one of the grounds for transfer of suit to this Court.
(3.) West Bengal Financial Corporation, respondent No. 3 has not filed his affidavit-in-opposition. Mr. Pinaki Ghosh appearing for the said respondent No. 3 leaves the matter to Court and wants to record the fact that he does not admit the allegations made in the said petition. As a matter of fact, he does align either with the petitioner or with Mr. Dilip Mitra's clients.;