Dismissed

Craft Mold (India) Private Limited v. Aadhithya Foundation

Madras HC26 Feb 2024A/6309/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court in an application seeking summary disposal of a suit for recovery of money found triable issues regarding contract prices and delay. It refused interlocutory relief and directed both parties to proceed to trial.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; issues not triable at interlocutory stage; parties directed to file written statement and go for trial.

Craft Mold (India) Private Limited Vs… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

A. No.6309 of 2023

¶2

A. No.6309 of 2023 in C.S. (COMM. DIV.) No.291 of 2023

¶3

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

¶4

M/s.Craft Mold (India) Private Ltd. . .. Applicant v s. M/s.Aadhithya Foundation . .. Respondent

¶5

The suit has been filed for recovery of money. The plaintiff has engaged the services of the respondent / defendant for the construction of Factory building. As seen from the averments contained in the plaint as well as in the affidavit filed in support of this application, there is a dispute pertaining to two Work Orders issued by the applicant /plaintiff to the respondent / defendant. In One Work Order, the contract price is disclosed and in the other Work Order, a different contract price is disclosed. The plaintiff claims that in view of the delay on the part of the defendant to complete the work they have to engage the services of a third party. They claim loss at the rates fixed under the 2 nd Work Order. However, as seen from the counter affidavit filed by the respondent / defendant, the respondent / defendant disputes the 2 nd Work Order and they claim that only the 1 st Work Order was issued and based on the

¶6

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

¶7

1/3

¶8

A. No.6309 of 2023

¶9

same payments were made by the plaintiff to the defendant. They also

¶10

dispute that there was a delay on their part to complete the work.

¶11

According to them, no loss has been suffered by the plaintiff.

¶12

2. After giving due consideration to the aforementioned contentions of the respective parties, this Court is of the considered view that triable issues are involved and therefore the directions sought for in this application cannot be granted by this Court at the interlocutory stage

¶13

Necessarily the parties will have to go for trial.

¶14

3. For the foregoing reasons, this Court is of the considered view

¶15

that at this interlocutory stage, the relief sought for by the applicant / plaintiff cannot be granted as several triable issues are involved which can be adjudicated only after trial.

¶16

4. Accordingly, this application is disposed of in the aforementioned terms. Both the parties are directed to go for trial.

¶17

5. Post the matter for filing of written statement by the defendant

on 14.03.2024 .

26.02.2024

vsi2

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

¶22

2/3

¶23

A. No.6309 of 2023

¶24

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

¶25

vsi2

¶26

A. No.6309 of 2023 in

¶27

C.S. (COMM. DIV.) No.291 of 2023

¶28

26.02.2024

¶29

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

¶30

3/3

Craft Mold (India) Private Limited v. Aadhithya Foundation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Craft Mold (India) Private Limited v. Aadhithya Foundation

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

P.S.Kavitha and 13 Others Vs M/s.Assured Capital Services, and 6 others

M/s.Chellamuthu Devar Films Vs Nic Arts and 5 others

Itc Limited Vs Britannia Industries Limited

K.Madeswari Vs v.P.Babumathy

Compagnie De Saint Gobain and Another Vs Mrs Shehnaz Shahnawaj Sheikh

Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited Vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited