LAWS(CAL)-1985-6-35

TASHGLEN LIMITED Vs. TALAPATRA BROTHERS

Decided On June 12, 1985
Tashglen Limited Appellant
V/S
Talapatra Brothers Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On or about 30th Nov., 1978 the plaintiff petitioner Tashglen Ltd. in an action filed by it against the judgment debtor firm Talapatra Brothers obtained a judgment for £ 18,125 plus interest of £ 1361.09 aggregating £ 19,486.09 and further interest, in the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice of England in the Coventry District Registry.

(2.) The plaintiff decree holder has made two applications in this Court, one for execution of the said foreign judgment and the other inter alia for leave to execute the said judgment against the partners of the defendant judgment debtor firm.

(3.) By consent of parties both the applications are heard together. The tabular statement filed in the execution application is accompanied by a certified copy of the said judgment issued in accordance with Sec. 10 of the Foreign Judgment (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1930 and is accompanied by a certificate of the District Registrar of the Coventry District Registry, Queen's Bench Division of the Supreme Court of Judicature of England certifying that the notice of issue of the writ of summons was duly served personally on the defendant at their place of business, namely, 34, Armenian Street, Calcutta and the defendant duly appeared in the said action on the 14th Aug., 1978. It is also certified that the plaintiff obtained judgment against the defendant in the said court for £ 19,486.09 and £ 1,17968 for casts and interest at the rate of 9 % per annum from the date of the said judgment until payment. There is also a certificate by the said District Registrar that the amount of the judgment and coats remained wholly unsatisfied From the certified copy of the said judgment it appears that the said judgment was obtained by the plaintiff from said Court under the provisions of Oder 14 of the rules of the Supreme Court of England and that the pleadings in the said action consisted of the writ and the statement of claim and that no objection has been made to the jurisdiction of the Court.