Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Skf India Limited vs Banarasi Lal Madan And Ivan Fernandes ... on 27 January, 2020

Author: N. J. Jamadar

Bench: N. J. Jamadar

                                           903-IA1-19INCOMSS5-03.DOC

                                                                       Santosh

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
              ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                        IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION
                 INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1 OF 2019
                                IN
                 COMM SUMMARY SUIT NO. 5 OF 2003

SKF India Limited                                           ...Applicant
In the matter between
SKF India Limited                                              ...Plainitff
                     Versus
Banarasi Lal Madan                                         ...Defendant
                     And
Ivan Fernandes                                           ...Respondent

Mr. Cyrus Ardhesir, i/b Madekar & Co., for the Applicant/
      Plainitff.
Mr. Tushad Cooper, a/w Ankit Rajput, i/b Manoj Bhatt, for
      the Defendant.
Mr. Anil Agarwal, for the Respondent.
Mr. Ivan Fernandes, Respondent present.

                                CORAM:    N. J. JAMADAR, J.

DATED : 22nd JANUARY, 2020 PC:-

1. Heard the learned Counsels for the parties.
2. The learned Counsels for the parties make a joint statement that the interim application be disposed of in terms of order passed by this Court on 2nd December, 2019, whereunder by way of an ad-interim relief the defendant was directed to maintain status quo as regards the execution of the conveyance as well as parting with the possession of the suit fat. The said 1/2 ::: Uploaded on - 28/01/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 29/01/2020 00:45:43 ::: 903-IA1-19INCOMSS5-03.DOC ad-interim order came to be continued till the decision of this application by a subsequent order dated 2nd January, 2020.
3. The learned Counsel for the respondent submits that the respondent has instituted a suit, being Suit (L) No.1384 of 2019, against the defendant herein for specifc performance of the contract for sale of the suit fat.
4. The learned Counsels for the defendant and respondent submit that they have no objection for continuing the interim order of status quo as regards the execution of the conveyance as well as parting with the possession of the suit fat till the disposal of the suit. However, in the event any ad-interim or interim order being passed in the said suit, or of any settlement arrived at between the parties to the said suit, which has a bearing on the aforesaid status quo order, the respondent will inform the plaintiff, within three weeks of the passing of said order or settlement of the dispute, as the case may be, who shall then have the liberty to approach this Court for appropriate reliefs.
5. Interim application stands disposed of in terms of above agreed arrangement.
6. All contentions of the parties are kept open for consideration.

[N. J. JAMADAR, J.] 2/2 ::: Uploaded on - 28/01/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 29/01/2020 00:45:43 :::