Dismissed

Take Solutions Limited v. Madison Pacific Trust Limited

Madras HC11 Oct 2022CS/320/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On 11.10.2022, the High Court at Madras dismissed civil suit C.S.No.320 of 2021 filed by TAKE Solutions Limited as settled out of court. The court observed that the parties had agreed in principle to a settlement while a formal agreement was being finalized, and ordered a refund of court fees.

What did the court decide?

Suit dismissed as settled out of court; plaintiff entitled to refund of court fees.

Take Solutions Limited Vs Madison Pacific Trust Limited — Company and Corporate | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

C.S.No.320 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated : 11.10.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

¶6

C.S.No.320 of 2021

¶7

TAKE Solutions Limited

¶8

Represented by its Company Secretary, P.Srinivasan, No.27, Tank Bund Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034, India.

¶9

.. Plaintiff

¶10

/versus/

¶11

1.Madison Pacific Trust Limited, Represented by its Authorized Signatory, 54/F, Hopewell Center 183, Queen's Road East, Wanchai, Hong Kong.

¶12

2.TAKE Solutions Pte Ltd., Represented by its Authorized Signatory, 10 Anson Road,

¶13

#34-15 International Plaza, Singapore – 079 903.

¶14

3.TAKE Solutions Global Holdings Pte Ltd., Represented by its Authorized Signatory, 10, Anson Road, #30-13, International Plaza, Singapore - 079 903.

¶15

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

1/6

C.S.No.320 of 2021

Tel: +65 622 312 232

4.Patric Bance

5.M.Alagar

.. Defendants

This Civil Suit is filed under Order IV Rule 1 of the High Court of Original Side Rules read with Order VII Rule 1 of CPC., 1908 prayed for a judgment and decree against the Defendants:-

¶23

a).To pass an order of permanent injunction restraining the defendants Nos.1 to 4 from usurping the voting rights of the defendant No.2 in the plaintiff and interfering with the EGM of the plaintiff proposed to be held on 23.10.2021, in any manner whatsoever;

¶24

b).To pass an order of permanent injunction restraining the defendant Nos.1 and 4 from interfering with the implementation of the said transaction which has been duly approved by the Board of Directors of the plaintiff company and the lenders of defendant No.3;

¶25

c).To pass an order of mandatory injunction directing the defendant No.5 to disregard the vote cast by the defendant No.4 on behalf of defendant No.2 in the EGM of the plaintiff to be held on 23.10.2021.

¶26

2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

C.S.No.320 of 2021

¶28

For Plaintiff : Mr.Sashidhar Sivakumar For D1 : Mr.P.Vinod Kumar For M/s.Sagar Associates For D2 and D4 : Mr.P.V.Balasubramanian For M/s.BFS Legall For D5 : Mr.T.V.Suresh Kumar

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

The learned counsel for the plaintiff forwarded a memo, in

¶31

which, the communication to him from the plaintiff is also enclosed. The

¶32

communication to the learned counsel for the plaintiff is as follows:-

¶33

“ 15 September 2022

¶34

Dear Sashi,

¶35

As discussed, please initiate withdrawal of suit C.S.No.320 of 2021 from Madras High Court.

¶36

Please also take note that the Promoter Company i.e TAKE Solutions Pte Ltd., Singapore and the Lenders have agreed to settle the matter out of Court.

¶37

The terms and conditions of the settlement have been agreed in principle and a formal Settlement Agreement is

¶38

3/6

¶39

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

¶40

C.S.No.320 of 2021

¶41

in the process of finalizing. Kind regards, Avaneesh Singh Sr. VP – chief Legal Officer TAKE Solutions Ltd 27, Tank Bund Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. Mob - +91 9810537587”

¶42

2 . The memo is as follows:

¶43

1.The parties have agreed to settle the matter out of Court and have in principle agreed to the terms and conditions of the settlement while the formal settlement agreement is in the process of finalizing. Hence, it is most prayed that the plaintiff be permitted to withdraw the present suit and the same may be dismissed as withdrawn. The copy of the email dated 15.09.2022 sent by the plaintiff instructing the withdrawal of the present suit is filed herewith.

¶44

2.Under such circumstances, it is most respectfully prayed that the Registry be directed to refund to the plaintiff the total Court fee of Rs.1,12,600/- paid by them. Dated at Chennai on this the 15^th day of September, 2022.”

¶45

4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶46

C.S.No.320 of 2021

¶47

3. The learned counsel for the plaintiff also made the following

¶48

endorsement:

¶49

“It is most respectfully prayed that the plaintiff be permitted to withdraw the present suit as settled out of Court”

¶50

4. In view of the fact that the parties have settled the matter out

¶51

of Court, the Suit is dismissed as settled out of Court. The plaintiff is entitled for refund of Court fees in accordance with rules. The Court fees may be refunded to the authorized person of the plaintiff and identified by the learned counsel for the plaintiff.

¶52

11.10.2022 smv (1/2)

¶53

Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No

¶54

5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶55

C.S.No.320 of 2021

¶56

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.

smv

C.S.No.320 of 2021

(1/2)

11.10.2022

6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Take Solutions Limited v. Madison Pacific Trust Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Take Solutions Limited v. Madison Pacific Trust Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.Kokila Vs v.Seshaya and 4 others

P.Ravi kumar Vs R.Vijayalakshmi and 3 others

Navaneetham Vs Nil

Mr.Vembu Vs Mr.v.G.Ramakrishnan

M/s Ayan Tech Solutions Pvt. Ltd, Represented by its Director Madhu Kudapa Vs Mr.Ravi Balaji

Pennar Senior Fc and 11 Others Vs Govt of Tamilnadu and 3 Others