In an appeal against the refusal of ad-interim relief, the High Court found that the appellant failed to prove payment of consideration under a 2002 agreement for film rights. The appeal was dismissed in limine, holding the trial judge acted correctly.
Appeal dismissed in limine.
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 O.O.C.J. APPEAL NO.61 OF 2006 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO. OF 2006 IN SUIT NO. 256 OF 2006
Ravinderpal Singh Bains v/s.
Kareena Sana Combine and others
.. Appeallnt
.. Respondents
Mr.A.Y.Bookwala i/by M/s.Ranjit & Co. for the appellant.
Ms.Ranjana Todankar for the respondent No.1.
CORAM : R.M. LODHA & ANOOP V.MOHTA, JJ.
DATED : 7TH FEBRUARY, 2006.
P.C.
Heard Mr.A.Y.Bookwala, the learned counsel for the appellant.
the plaintiff'), by the agreement dated 16<sup>th</sup> August, 2002, overseas rights for the entire world excluding India were granted in respect of the suit picture Mere Jeevan Saathi'. The consideration of the agreement was finalised at Rs.3.75 crores. As per the agreement, Rs.1,00,00,000/- was to be paid on the signing of the memorandum of agreement. According to the plaintiff, the said amount was paid by transfer of Rs.65,00,000/- ($ 25289 on 8th August, 2001 and $ 62,689.85 on 25th September, 2001) to Shree Krishna Exports Pvt.Ltd. by way of transfer from the Lloyds TSB Bank and Rs.35,00,000/- was paid to Bobby Anand.2
Mere Jeevan Saathi'. The defendants' have set up the case that as the plaintiff committed default in payment of Rs.1,00,00,000/-, they entered into an arrangement with defendant No.2 on 22.2.2005 in respect of the overseas rights for the film Mere Jeevan Saathi' in supersession of all other previous agreements.3
(R.M.LODHA, J.)
(ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant had established the subsisting agreement dated 16.8.2002 regarding the overseas rights of the film Mere Jeevan Saathi.
Whether the trial Judge erred in refusing to grant the ad-interim relief to the appellant.
Ravinderpal Singh Bains
Kareena Sana Combine
R.M. LODHA
ANOOP V. MOHTA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court