Allowed

Raj Television Network Limited Represented By Its Authorized Signatory Mr Manimaran S v. Modern Digitech Media LLP

Madras HC14 Mar 2024A/647/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the applicant's application to amend the cause title in the plaint and affidavit, noting that no interim order had been granted previously, ensuring no prejudice to respondents.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed. Learned counsel directed to carry out the amendment of the cause title in terms of the order.

Raj Television Network Limited Represented By… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

A.No.647 of 2024 in C.S. (Comm.Div.) No.15 of 2024

¶2

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

¶3

This application has been filed seeking for amendment of the short and long cause title in the plaint and in the affidavit filed in support of the Interlocutory Applications.

¶4

2.Learned counsel for the first respondent/first defendant would submit that the applicant/plaintiff has played fraud upon this Court by making the 'TAMIL CINEMA' as the first respondent/first defendant in the suit, though they knowing fully well that 'TAMIL CINEMA' is owned by 'Modern Digitech Media LLP'. He would also submit that a caveat was filed by 'Modern Digitech Media LLP' before this Court on 05.01.2024, which was alive when the suit was filed. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 'Modern Digitech Media LLP' raising objections with regard to this application filed by the applicant/plaintiff.

¶5

3.Admittedly, no interim order has been granted in favour of the applicant/plaintiff even though the same was sought for in O.A. No.40 of 2024 and A.No.367 of 2024. A counter affidavit has also been filed by the first respondent/first defendant in those applications.

¶6

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

¶7

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

¶8

vga

¶9

4.Considering the fact that no interim order has been granted till date

¶10

in favour of the applicant/plaintiff, this Court is of the considered view that no prejudice would be caused if this application is allowed, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respondents in O.A. No.40 of 2024 and A.No.367 of 2024.

¶11

5.Accordingly, this application is allowed as prayed for. Learned

¶12

counsel for the applicant/plaintiff is directed to carry out the amendment in terms of this order. However, it is made clear that this application is allowed, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respondents in the connected applications in O.A. No.40 of 2024 and A.No.367 of 2024 and in the main suit.

¶13

14.03.2024

¶14

vga

¶15

Note: Post the suit and connected applications on 08.04.2024.

¶16

A.No.647 of 2024 in C.S. (Comm.Div.) No.15 of 2024

¶17

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

Raj Television Network Limited Represented By Its Authorized Signatory Mr Manimaran S v. Modern Digitech Media LLP

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Television Network Limited Represented By Its Authorized Signatory Mr Manimaran S v. Modern Digitech Media LLP

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

Reliance Industries Limited Vs Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited and 28 others

Omr Mall Developers Private Limited, Vs Future Generali India Insurance Company Limited

Sastha Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

M/s Bharani Pictures Private Limited Rep By Its Manager Ramakrishna Bhatt Vs Narne Media Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

La Renon Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Vs Centaur Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd.

M/S. Paterson Consulting Group Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ms Shiela Ajay Pratheeb