Dismissed

Beacon Trusteeship Limited v. Aaditri Estate Developers Private Limited

Bombay HC2 Aug 2023COMS/98/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment records the disposition of a commercial suit and two interim lodging applications. The instant application to vary parties was allowed due to lack of objection. The main suit was dismissed as withdrawn by the parties.

What did the court decide?

The application to substitute parties was allowed. The suit was noted as withdrawn and disposed of.

Beacon Trusteeship Limited Vs Aaditri Estate… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

906.COMS.98.2023II.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

COMMERCIAL SUIT NO. 98 OF 2023

¶4

WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (LODGING) NO. 39865 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (LODGING) NO. 19437 OF 2023

¶5

¶6

COMMERCIAL SUIT NO. 98 OF 2023

¶7

(This order is corrected as per speaking to the minutes of the order dated 11^th August, 2023) Beacon Trusteeship Limited ...Applicant/Plaintiff

¶8

Versus

¶9

Aaditri Estate Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. ...Defendants

¶10

¶11

MAMTA AMAR KALE

¶12

Digitally signed by MAMTA AMAR KALE Date: 2023.08.11 18:12:39 +0530

¶13

Mr. Abhineet Sharma & Ms. Riya Gokalgandhi i/by RHP Partners, for Applicant/Plaintiff.

¶14

Mr. Tahir Prande i/by Juris Consillis, for Defendant Nos. 1 to 3.

¶15

Ms. Falguni Thakkar i/by DSK Legal, for Defendant Nos. 4 to 10. ***

¶16

CORAM : MANISH PITALE, J. DATE : 02^nd AUGUST, 2023.

¶17

P. C. :

¶18

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 19437 OF 2023

¶19

By this application, the Applicants/Plaintiffs seek to delete the name of Respondent No. 7 – Vijay Vitthal Panchal from the array of parties and to substitute the name of Ankur Gangar as Defendant No. 7. It is pointed out that Vijay Vitthal Panchal retired from the Defendant No. 4 – Partnership Firm and the said Ankur Gangar was inducted as partner.

¶20

The learned Counsel appearing for the Defendant No. 4 –

¶21

Partnership Firm, on instructions, states that there is no objection in

¶22

Page1 of 2

¶23

Shrikant

¶24

906.COMS.98.2023II.doc

¶25

allowing the present application. Accordingly, the application is allowed.

¶26

Consequentially, the amendment be carried out within one week from today. Re-verification is dispensed with.

¶27

The learned Counsel for Defendant No. 4 and the erstwhile Defendant No. 7 undertakes to file Vakalatnama on behalf of the newly added Ankur Gangar i.e. Defendant No. 7. It is further submitted that, the learned Counsel now appearing for Defendant Nos. 4 to 10 has taken no objection from the earlier advocate and that Vakalatnama on behalf of the said Defendants would be filed within a period of one week from today.

¶28

COMMERCIAL SUIT NO. 98 OF 2023

¶29

The learned Counsel appearing for the Plaintiff informs

¶30

this Court that parties have now settled their inter-se dispute out of Court and that therefore, he has instructions to withdraw the present suit. Accordingly, the suit is disposed of as withdrawn.

¶31

Pending interim applications, if any, also stand disposed

¶32

of.

¶33

The Court Fees shall be refunded as per rules.

¶34

(MANISH PITALE, J.)

¶35

Page2 of 2

¶36

Shrikant

Beacon Trusteeship Limited v. Aaditri Estate Developers Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Beacon Trusteeship Limited v. Aaditri Estate Developers Private Limited

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

Dr Stanley Philip Dleema vs Adly Alva

K Sera Sera Box Office Private Limited vs Niba Enterprises

Kripa Oneness Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union Bank of India and 2 Ors.

Mukesh Ravgi Thakkar vs Jugalkishor K. Jasani

Shyamprabha Smartpack Pvt. Ltd. Vs Supriya Shailesh Patel and 3 Ors.

Patil Construction and Infrastructure Limited Vs Ms. Rapid Infra and Mining LLP