Ultratech Cement Limited and Anr. v. City Cement Private Limited
Case brief
What is this about?
The Bombay High Court decreed Suit No. 449 of 2016 based on settled consent terms signed by authorized representatives of both parties, dispensing with a drawn-up decree. The order also directed the disposal of seized goods and discharge of the court receiver upon payment of costs.
What did the court decide?
Suit decreed in accordance with consent terms; seized goods to be moved by defendants and bags destroyed within four weeks; court receiver discharged on plaintiffs paying costs.
What the court decided
907-S449-16.DOC
SHEPHALI
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO. 449 OF 2016
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1404 OF 2016
Ultratech Cement Limited & Another…Plaintiffs
Versus
City Cement Private Limited…Defendants
Ms. Alka Parelkar, with Ms. Khushboo Bhatt, i/b V.A. Associates, for
the Plaintiffs.
Mr. V.V. Mohite, for the Defendants.
CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: 8th July 2016
PC:-
1.The Suit is settled. Consent Terms are tendered. These are
signed by one Mr. Rajesh Lunawat, the Manager-Central
Commercial Coordinator for Plaintiff No. 1 and as a Constituted
Attorney of Plaintiff No. 2 and by Mr. Narendra Gopal Singhal,
Managing Director of the Defendant. They are also signed by the
Advocates for the parties. Mr. Singhal is personally present in
Court. Mr. Lunawat is unable to attend the Court on account of his
prior commitments.
Coram
G. S. Patel
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court