The Court by an order dated 11.11.2016 dismissed the appeal against an interim injunction order passed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 CPC, upholding the single Judge's decision.
The appeal is dismissed.
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.
$~4
..... Appellant
Through Mr Gagan Mathur, Adv. with Mr Varun Kumar, Adv.
versus
RAKESH KUMAR & ORS ..... Respondents Through None.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR
We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant at length. We are in agreement with the decision taken by the learned single Judge particularly in view of the fact that he has followed the decisions of this Court specifically in Wipro Limited vs. Beckman Coulter International SA: 131 (2006) DLT 681] . In any event, the impugned order is only an order passed in the Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 application and obviously these are based on a prime facie view. The appellant would have full opportunity of making out its case in the suit.
The appeal is dismissed.
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J
NOVEMBER 11, 2016/ab
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appeal against the Order XXXIX application order should be allowed.
Whether the single Judge's decision relying on Wipro Limited vs. Beckman Coulter International SA was correct.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Wipro Limited vs. Beckman Coulter International SA: 131 (2006) DLT 681Followed¶12
M/S STELLAR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LTD
RAKESH KUMAR & ORS
BADAR DURREZ AHMED
ASHUTOSH KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
