The High Court of Bombay dismissed an appeal against an interim order requiring the appellant to deposit Rs 40 lakhs against the respondent-plaintiff's claim for outstanding goods supplied under a Memorandum of Understanding.
The appeal was dismissed and the time limit for deposit of the amount was extended.
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
APP597-12
Mlns
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
APPEAL NO. 597 OF 2012 in SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO. 186 OF 2010
IN
SUMMARY SUIT NO.578 OF 2010
Om Textile Pvt. Ltd. … Appellant Vs. Coastal Energy Pvt. Ltd. … Respondent
Mr Rakesh Agarwal, for appellant.
Benny Joseph with T.V.Louis, A.P.Singh, Jaywant Awhad, i/by M/s Benny Joseph Law Offices, for respondent.
CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & N.M. JAMDAR J. Monday, October 1, 2012.
P.C.:
The appeal is directed against the order dated 29 June 2012 of the learned Single Judge of this Court in so far as in the respondentplaintiff's Summons for judgment in Summary Suit under Order.XXXVII Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the learned Judge has directed the appellant to deposit an amount of Rs.40 lakhs in 12 weeks, while granting leave to defend the suit.
2
APP597-12
Mlns
the maximum period of 12 months. The parties also agreed that at the end of agreed period of 12 months, if any outstanding amount was still payable, the plaintiff has a right to take interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum on the balance remaining amount.
3
APP597-12
Mlns
Laxmi Processors. Hence the total amount payable by appellantdefendant to the plaintiff would be Rs.34,88,706/- with interest at the rate of 18 % per annum. According to the plaintiff's calculation, the amount payable by the appellant-defendant to the plaintiff as on 1 January 2010 was Rs.51,84,155/-.
7. Appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
CHIEF JUSTICE
N.M.JAMDAR, J.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appeal against the order requiring the appellant to deposit a sum in pursuance of a monetary claim admits of interference.
Whether the appellant is liable to pay an account for outstanding dues along with interest.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Om Textile Pvt. Ltd.
Coastal Energy Pvt. Ltd.
Mohit S. Shah
N.M. Jamdar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
