Mukand Sumi Special Steel Limitied v. Sanco Trans Limitied
Case brief
What is this about?
Court vacated orders regarding security and status quo and closed ancillary applications after the applicant submitted instructions that the main original application is not being prosecuted. This adjournment order resolves nothing.
What did the court decide?
Orders directing security and maintaining status quo were vacated; applications were closed.
What the court decided
A.Nos.3252, 4893 and 4894 of 2021 and O.A.No.557 of 2021 in C.S.No.56 of 2021
A.Nos.3252, 4893 and 4894 of 2021 and O.A.No.557 of 2021
in C.S.No.56 of 2021
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.
A.No.3252 of 2021 was filed to furnish security for a sum of Rs.3,64,55,033/-. By order dated 16.09.2021, the respondents were directed to furnish security by 21.10.2021. By a subsequent order dated 21.10.2021, the respondents were directed to maintain status quo in respect of the property described in the schedule to the judges summons in O.A.No.557 of 2021. The respondents filed A.No.4893 of 2021 to vacate the order dated 16.09.2021 and A.No.4894 of 2021 to suspend the order.
- At the hearing today, learned counsel for the applicant/plaintiff submits, on instructions, that the plaintiff does not intend to prosecute O.A.No.557 of 2021 and A.No.3252 of 2021. He further submits that the said applications may be closed.
1/1
A.Nos.3252, 4893 and 4894 of 2021 and O.A.No.557 of 2021 in C.S.No.56 of 2021
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY,J.,
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether applications filed for security, vacation of order, and suspension are to be closed upon submission that the main suit is not being prosecuted.
Coram
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court