Dismissed

Videocon Industries Ltd,.Mumbai. v. R. Ramkrishnan., Tamilnadu. and Another.

Bombay HC10 Feb 2009APP/6/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal disposed by consent order. Judgment of Single Judge set aside. Unconditional leave granted to respondents to defend suit under Order 37 CPC. Suits consolidated triable together.

What did the court decide?

Judgment of Single Judge dated 14.10.2008 set aside. Respondents granted unconditional leave to defend suit under Order 37 CPC. Suits consolidated.

Videocon Industries Ltd,.Mumbai. Vs R… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

-1-

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

APPEAL NO. 6 OF 2009 IN CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 1103 OF 2007 IN SUIT NO. 418 OF 2006

¶5

Videocon Industries Ltd

¶6

Versus

¶7

R Ramkrishnan and others

¶8

).. Respondents

¶9

Mr R D Soni i/b Ram & Co for the Appellant. Mr S H Mehta a/w Mr N M Shah for Respondents.

¶10

CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. DATED : 10TH FEBRUARY 2009

¶11

P.C.

¶12

During the course of hearing of this Appeal, the learned Counsel appearing for the parties have agreed, upon instructions from their respective clients, that the Appeal can be disposed of by a consented order. The agreed terms are :-

¶13

(a) The Judgment dated 14^th October 2008 of the learned Single Judge under Appeal shall stand set

¶14

-2-

¶15

aside.

¶16

(b) The Respondents in the present Appeal will be granted unconditional leave to defend the Suit which has been filed under the provisions of Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure as a Summary Suit;

¶17

(c) The Written Statement shall be filed within eight weeks from today. The Suit shall be listed before the learned Single Judge for framing of Issues thereafter.

¶18

(d) Chamber Summons No. 1103 of 2007 shall be listed afresh for hearing before the learned Single Judge. However, the Court would be at liberty to frame preliminary issue, if it so desires and try the same in its discretion as a preliminary issue separately or as an issue to be tried with all other issues.

¶19

(e) The parties are also agreed that in view of the Order of the Supreme Court dated 5^th January

¶20

-3-

¶21

2009 passed in Civil Appeal No. 4 of 2009 arising out of SLP (C) No. 13250 of 2006 (R. Saravana Prabhu and another vs. M/s Videocon Leasing & Indl. Fin. Ltd. & anr.), which is between the Company of which the present Respondents are the Directors and the Appellants in the said Suit may also be tried together with this Suit.

¶22

(f) Both the Suits, namely, Summary Suit No.475 of 1999 and Summary Suit No.418 of 2006 are ordered to be consolidated.

¶23

In view of the above agreed terms, the Judgment under Appeal of the learned Single Judge dated 14^th October 2008 is set aside. The parties would abide by the agreed terms which shall be treated as an order of this Court.

¶24

Appeal accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶25

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶26

-4-

¶27

DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.

Videocon Industries Ltd,.Mumbai. v. R. Ramkrishnan., Tamilnadu. and Another.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Videocon Industries Ltd,.Mumbai. v. R. Ramkrishnan., Tamilnadu. and Another.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yogesh Nandu Yadav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Abu Asim Azmi Vs Union of India and Ors.

Mrs. Sana Yusuf Baugwala Vs Union F India and Anr.

Anilkumar Vidyashankar Mishra Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Kishan Dalelsingh Gehlot and 4 Ors. Vs Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation and 7 Ors.

Bevenue Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Maharshtra Housing and Area Development Authority and 4 Ors.