Allowed

Mr.Kannan Ranganathan v. Bank International Indon- Esia and Anr.

Bombay HC2 Jul 2014S/1310/2000

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay at Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction allowed the Plaintiff's application to withdraw Suit No. 1310 of 2000. The suit was dismissed as withdrawn with a direction for the withdrawal of funds deposited with the Debt Recovery Tribunal under consent terms subject to the suit.

What did the court decide?

The suit was dismissed as withdrawn. Defendant No. 1 was entitled to withdraw the deposited amount along with accrued interest.

Mr.Kannan Ranganathan Vs Bank International… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

17-S1310-00.DOC

¶2

shephali

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO. 1310 OF 2000

¶4

Mr. Kannan Ranganathan…Plaintiff
Versus

¶5

Bank International Indonesia & anr.…Defendants

¶6

Mr. Sanjay Udeshi, with Mr. Mahesh Londhe, i/b M/s. Sanjay
Udeshi & Co., for the Plaintiff.

¶7

Mr. Mayur Khandeparkar, i/b M/s. Kanga & Co., for the
Defendants.

¶8

CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: 2nd July 2014

¶9

PC:-

¶10

1.Mr. Udeshi, learned advocate for the Plaintiffs, on written
instructions from the Plaintiffs, seeks leave to withdraw the suit.
The Plaintiff is personally present in Court. Mr. Udeshi points out
that his written instructions are contained in letter dated 27th June
2014 from the Plaintiff to Mr. Udeshi. The letter dated 27th June
2014 is taken on record and marked ‘X’ for identification.

¶11

2.The suit is dismissed as withdrawn. Refund of court fees as
per Rules.

¶12

1 of 2

¶13

17-S1310-00.DOC

¶14

3.Consent terms were filed in Notice of Motion No. 2170 of
2006 in this suit. The Plaintiff has, under those consent terms,
deposited some amount with the Debt Recovery Tribunal in
Original Application No. 62 of 2003. This amount was directed to
be invested by the Debt Recovery Tribunal and was made subject to
the outcome of the suit. In view of the withdrawal of the suit, the
Defendant No. 1 shall be entitled to withdraw that amount along
with all accrued interest.

¶15

4. Refund of Court Fees in accordance with the Rules. All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order.

¶16

(G. S. PATEL, J.)

¶17

2 of 2

Mr.Kannan Ranganathan v. Bank International Indon- Esia and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.Kannan Ranganathan v. Bank International Indon- Esia and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs. Betty Kapadia and Anr. Vs M/S.Magna Publishing Co. Ltd. and Ors.

Cadila Healthcare Ltd. Vs Laurel Life Science (India) Pvt. Ltd.

Ajanta Pharma Limited Vs Mepfarma India Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.

Mahafrine Kerfegar Eduljee (Plaintiff NO.1) Vs Kerfegar Dinshaw Eduljee (Plaintiff NO.2)

Mrs. Usha Shiv Bhardwaj Vs Ramesh Ramrao Wandrekar and Ors.

Rajiv Suri Vs Siticable Network Ltd.