Disposed
Jindal Vijaynagar Steel Ltd. v. David James and Sons
Bombay HCCHS/86/2005
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF
What the court decided
AI extract
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 86 OF 2005
IN
SUIT NO. 3355 OF 2004
Jindal Vijayanagar
Steel Limited. ... Plaintiffs.
vs.
David James & Sons Ltd.,
& Ors. ... Defendants.
Mr. M. Vasudeo with Ms. Cyathia Pereira
i/by Rajani Associates
for plaintiffs.
Mr. P.K. Samdani with Praveen Shetty i/by
Shaunak Satpute & Co.
for Defendant No.1.
CORAM : S.U. KAMDAR,J.
DATE : 9th FEBRUARY, 2005.
P.C.
1. The learned counsel appearing for the
plaintiffs states that he does not want to press
paragraph 23 A sub clause (c) of the amendment. He
2
also requests that the sentence which is sought to
be added in paragraph 27 by virtue of paragraph 2 to
the schedule to the amendment be permitted to be
added at the end of paragraph 4 of the plaint. In
so far as the second request is concerned, I am not
inclined to grant the same for the simple reason in
the present case a serious issue as to the
jurisdiction of this Court to entertain the suit as
framed is required to be considered and tried at an
appropriate stage. It is well settled position that
a party cannot bring a suit within the jurisdiction
by way of an amendment in a suit which was otherwise
not within the jurisdiction of this Court.
2. In the aforesaid circumstances, I am not
inclined to grant the request which has been made by
the learned counsel for the plaintiffs in so far as
paragraph 2 to the schedule of the amendment is
concerned.
3. In so far as other paragraphs to the
schedule are concerned, I find that there are merely
further details in respect of the cause of action
which has been raised in the ;suit and thus, in so
far as other paragraphs are concerned, there is no
serious reason why the said amendment should not be
granted.
4. In the aforesaid circumstances, I make the
3
chamber summons absolute in terms of prayer clause
(a) excluding sub para (c) of paragraph 23A and
paragraph 2 to the Schedule to the chamber summons.
5. Amendment to be carried out within a period
of two weeks from today. Chamber summons disposed
of accordingly. No order as to costs.
S.U. Kamdar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court