M.M.T.C. Ltd vs M/S.Medchi Chemicals & ... on 15 February, 2019

[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Bombay High Court

M.M.T.C. Ltd vs M/S.Medchi Chemicals & ... on 15 February, 2019

Bench: G.S. Patel

                                                                     921-S1152-97.DOC




 Shephali


      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
            ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                               SUIT NO. 1152 OF 1997


 MMTC Ltd                                                                 ...Plaintif
     Versus
 Medchi Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals Ltd                                ...Defendant


 Ms Naseem Patrawala, with Ms Nusrat Chaudhary, for the Plaintiff.


                               CORAM:       G.S. PATEL, J
                               DATED:       15th February 2019
 PC:-


 1.

The Plaintif, a Government company that manufactures and import various chemicals seeks a declaration that a Memorandum of Understanding dated 1st June 1994 and a first Addendum dated 16th/17th September 1994 were duly and validly terminated and cancelled; and a decree against the sole Defendant in the amount of Rs. 3,75,37,275/- as per the particulars of claim at Exhibit "I to the Plaint with interest on a principal amount of Rs. 2,86,06,476/- at the rate 24.5% per annum from 16th January 1997 until payment or realisation. I am evidently not going to decree the suit at this interest rate.

2. The Writ of Summons was served. The Defendant entered a Written Statement dated 30th April 2008. The Defendant has been Page 1 of 3 15th February 2019 ::: Uploaded on - 18/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 17/03/2019 14:47:29 ::: 921-S1152-97.DOC absent on previous dates in 2018 and 2019. I am informed that Mr Sanjeev Sawant who had entered appearance for the Defendant obtained a discharge. The record indicates that he and an Advocate holding for him appeared before SJ Kathawalla J on 6th January 2017.

3. The order of 11th February 2019 will need to be modified to this extent. That order said that there was neither appearance nor Written Statement. In fact there was an appearance at an earlier stage and also a Written Statement but the Advocate who entered appearance has since taken a discharge. If the Plaintifs do not have a copy of the Written Statement, they are at liberty to take a copy from the court records. A certified copy is not necessary.

4. The matter cannot proceed in these circumstances for an ex parte decree. The Suit is not undefended. There may be consequences to the Defendants' non-appearance and the suit might well be decreed in favour of the Plaintifs but that can only happen after the Defendants have been given notice that the suit is to be listed for final disposal, especially since their previous Advocate has taken a discharge.

5. The Registry will issue notice to the Defendants at the address given in the cause title of the suit. I notice in particular that the Defendants' registered office is in Secunderabad and this is all the more reason to ensure that adequate notice is given to the Defendants before any order is made on the Suit.

Page 2 of 3

15th February 2019 ::: Uploaded on - 18/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 17/03/2019 14:47:29 ::: 921-S1152-97.DOC

6. List the matter for directions on 3rd April 2019 at 3.00 pm.

7. The matter is not to be shown for ex parte decree.

(G. S. PATEL, J) Page 3 of 3 15th February 2019 ::: Uploaded on - 18/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 17/03/2019 14:47:29 :::

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Bombay High Court