P K SURESH Vs. ASHCON BUILDERS (P) LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON the last date of hearing, when the suit was placed before the Court for framing of issues, upon perusing the pleadings and hearing the submissions made by the counsels for the parties, it was deemed appropriate to direct the presence of the defendant No.2, for recording his statement under Order X Rule 2 CPC.

(2.) THE defendant No.2 is absent today. However, the defendant No.3 is present and hands over a copy of the Resolution dated 25.04.2015 passed by the Board of Directors of the defendant No.1/company, authorising him to appear on behalf of the company and take all necessary steps including filing affidavits, giving statements etc. before the Court to settle, mediate and enter into a compromise in the present suit.

(3.) WHEN the matter was taken up on the first call, the Court had started by posing some questions to the defendant No.3, for clarification of the averments made in the written statement. However, the defendant No.3 had stated that he was not well conversant with english language and had requested that he be given the assistance of Mr. Vincent M.K., the Project Manager of the defendant No.1/company, who was present in Court. Permission as requested was granted. Mr. Vincent M.K. had translated into vernacular some of the queries raised on the defendant No.3, but half way through the said interaction, at the request of the counsels for the parties, the matter was passed over to enable the parties to interact with each other directly and negotiate a settlement.