Allowed

Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v. Ronak Soap Factory

Bombay HC15 Mar 2017NMS/1629/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay, Bombay, by consent decree, granted the relief prayed for in a suit between Hindustan Unilever Limited and Ronak Soap Factory. The leave petition was made absolute under consent, the suit was decreed in terms of specific prayers, and the Court Receiver was discharged upon payment of dues.

What did the court decide?

Suit decreed in terms of consent; leave petition made absolute; Court Receiver discharged.

Hindustan Unilever Ltd. Vs Ronak Soap Factory — Specific Performance | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

921-NMSL369-17.DOC

¶2

SHEPHALI

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION(L) NO. 369 OF 2017

¶4

IN

¶5

SUIT (L) NO. 105 OF 2017 WITH

¶6

LEAVE PETITION NO. 60 OF 2017

¶7

Hindustan Unilever Limited… Applicants
In the matter between
Hindustan Unilever Limited… Plaintiffs
Versus
Ronak Soap Factory… Defendants

¶8

Mr Nikhil Sharma, a/w Ms Vrinda Gambhir, i/b WS Kane & Co for
the Plaintiffs.
Mr Samad Yunusbhai, Proprietor of the Defendant, present.
Dr MS Deshpande, Court Receiver is present.

¶9

CORAM:G.S. PATEL, J
DATED:15th March 2017

¶10

PC:-

¶11

1.By consent, the Petition for leave under Clause XIV is made
absolute.

¶12

Page 1 of 2
15th March 2017

¶13

921-NMSL369-17.DOC

¶14

2. Mr Samad Yunusbhai, Proprietor of the Defendant and who is personally present in Court, says that the Defendant submits to a decree in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b) and (d) of the Suit.

¶15

3.Mr Sharma, therefore, does not presses his prayer for
damages.

¶16

4.The Suit is decreed in these terms with no order as to costs.
Drawn up decree is dispensed with. Refund of Court Fees, if any, in
accordance with the Rules.

¶17

5.The Court Receiver had sealed certain goods. These are to be
destroyed by the Defendants at their cost within a period of 12
weeks.

¶18

6.The Court Receiver stands discharged without passing
accounts but on payment of his costs, charges and expenses within
four weeks from today by the Plaintiffs.

¶19

7. Notice of Motion (L) No. 369 of 2017 does not survive and is disposed of accordingly.

¶20

8. All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this Order.

¶21

(G. S. PATEL, J.)

¶22

Page 2 of 2
15th March 2017

Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v. Ronak Soap Factory

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v. Ronak Soap Factory

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shree Ameya Co. Operattive Housing Society Ltd. Vs Smt Laxmibai Ganpat Chogle and 16 Others

Nayan Arvind Shah Vs Jayesh Kanji Maru and Anr.

Sony Pictures Networks India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Digivive Services Pvt. Ltd.

Hindustan Unilever Ltd. Vs Ronak Soap Factory

Hindustan Unilever Limited Vs Mangal Enterprises

Hindustan Unilever Limited Vs Mangal Enterprises