Disposed
Thermax Ltd. v. Hindustan Dorr-Oliver Ltd. and Anr.
Bombay HCS/39/2000
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
Hindustan Dorr-Oliver Limited & Anr. (SUIT NO. 39 OF 2000)
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
SUIT NO. 39 OF 2000
Thermax Limited
...Plaintiff
vs.
Hindustan Dorr-Oliver Limited & Anr....Defendants
Mr.P.A. Kabadi i/b. M/s.Doijode Associates for the
Plaintiff.
Mr.Mayur Khandeparkar i/b. M/s.Kanga & Co. for
Defendants.
CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J.
DATED : SEPTEMBER 11, 2009
P.C. :-
1Parties have settled the matter. They have
filed Consent Terms. Consent Terms are taken on
record and marked �X� for the purpose of
identification. Consent Terms are signed by the
plaintiff and defendant No.1 and by their respective
Advocates. Parties are present in the Court.
2Suit, accordingly, is decreed in terms of
Consent Terms. Undertaking given by Defendant No.1
2
in para 2 is accepted. Suit is, accordingly, is
disposed of.
3Counsel for the plaintiff submits that the
suit against defendant no.2 may be withdrawn. Suit
is withdrawn as against defendant no.2. Decree is
passed in the aforesaid terms. Refund of Court Fees
be paid in accordance with Rules.
V.M. Kanade
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court