Allowed

M/S. Sundaram Industries Ltd., v. M/S. Natsyn Rubber Recycling

Madras HC7 Jul 2021CRP/247/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that the First Appellate Court erred in adjudicating merits on an interim injunction application. Revision petition allowed, Respondents directed to maintain status-quo, and Trial Court directed to dispose suit within three months.

What did the court decide?

Reversed appellate order to go into merits; directed maintenance of status-quo; directed Trial Court to dispose suit within three months.

M/S. Sundaram Industries Ltd., Vs M/S… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

C.R.P.(NPD) No.247 of 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 07.07.2021

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

C.R.P.(NPD) No.247 of 2018 and C.M.P.No.1402 of 2018 M/s.Sundaram Industries Limited, Rep. by its Senior Manager, Legal & Authorized representative S.Habibullah, S/o.Late Md.Abdullah, No.180, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 006. ... Petitioner Vs 1.M/s.Natsyn Rubber Recycling Private Limited, Rep. by its Director Kavivannan, S/o.Sundaram, No.24/13, Jansi Rani Street, Maraimalai Nagar, Chennai 603 209. 2.S.Kavivannan 3.S.Sandeep Kumar Panda 4.S.Hemavathi ... Respondents

¶7

1/6

¶8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶9

C.R.P.(NPD) No.247 of 2018

¶10

Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of CPC, against the Judgment and Decree of the Principal District Judge, Kancheepuram District at Chengalpattu dated 21.08.2017 made in C.M.A.No.7 of 2015 reversing the fair and decreetal order of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Chengalpattu made in I.A.No.365 of 2015 in O.S.No.91 of 2015 dated

¶11

28.07.2015.

¶12

For Petitioner : M/s.Norton and Grant
For Respondents : Mr.S.Ravikumar for R1
R4 - Not Ready in Notice
R2 and R3 - Notice Served
**********
O R D E R

¶13

This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the Judgment and Decree

¶14

of the learned Principal District Judge, Kancheepuram District at Chengalpattu dated 21.08.2017 made in C.M.A.No.7 of 2015 reversing the fair and decreetal order of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Chengalpattu made in I.A.No.365 of 2015 in O.S.No.91 of 2015, thereby granted interim injunction.

¶15

2/6

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶17

C.R.P.(NPD) No.247 of 2018

¶18

The petitioner is the plaintiff and the respondents are the

¶19

defendants in the said suit. The petitioner / plaintiff filed the said suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their agents, servants, representatives or any one else claiming on behalf of them from carrying on business of manufacturing, marketing, selling, distributing, servicing or in any manner associating with the manufacture and supply of Devulcanized Rubber Compound or Crumb to any person using the technology and / or process adopted and used by the plaintiff / petitioner and / or which is similar, duplicated or identical thereto.

¶20

The petitioner also filed the application for interim injunction and

¶21

the Court below granted an order of interim injunction on 28.07.2015. Aggrieved by the same, the respondents filed the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal before the Principal District Court, Kancheepuram District at Chengalpattu as against the order of interim injunction. The 1st Appellate Court set aside the interim injunction order and dismissed the application for interim injunction for the reason that the respondents have made out a

¶22

prima facie case by allowing C.M.A.No.7 of 2015 by Judgment dated 21.08.2017.

¶23

3/6

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶25

C.R.P.(NPD) No.247 of 2018

¶26

This Court is of the considered opinion that the First Appellate

¶27

Court ought not to have gone into the merits of the said suit. Therefore, the respondents are directed to maintain status-quo till the disposal of the main suit. The Trial Court is directed to dispose the suit, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶28

Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No order as to costs. 07.07.2021 Internet:Yes Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non speaking order rna

¶29

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶30

4/6

¶31

C.R.P.(NPD) No.247 of 2018

¶32

¶33

1.The Principal District Judge, Kancheepuram District, Chengalpattu.

¶34

2.The Principal Subordinate Judge, Chengalpattu.

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶36

5/6

¶37

C.R.P.(NPD) No.247 of 2018

¶38

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J,

¶39

rna

¶40

C.R.P.(NPD) No.247 of 2018
and C.M.P.No.1402 of 2018
07.07.2021

¶41

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶42

6/6

M/S. Sundaram Industries Ltd., v. M/S. Natsyn Rubber Recycling

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Sundaram Industries Ltd., v. M/S. Natsyn Rubber Recycling

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lakshmammaw/O Late Byya Reddy Vs N.Krishnan

Saraswathi (Died) Vs S.Seerangan

P.Balasubramanian Vs Victoria @ Balasundari Ammal(Died)

C. Chelladurai Vs C. Gurusamy

S.Sivanantham Vs Geetha

Mrs Shanthi Anand Kumar Vs M/S Tipstech Private Limited