Bombay High Court
Indo German Alkaloids And Anr vs Saldanha Realty And Infrastructure Pvt ... on 5 December, 2018
Author: K.R.Shriram
Bench: K.R.Shriram
1/4 45.COMS33.17.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
COMMERCIAL SUIT NO.33 OF 2017
INDO German Alkaloids and Anr. )....Plaintiffs
V/s.
Saldanha Realty & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. & ors.)....Defendants
----
Mr.Atharva Sawant a/w Ms.Soniya Putta I/by Solomon & Co. for plaintiffs.
Mr.Victor A.Almeida for defendant nos.1 & 2. Mr.Melvyn Fernandes I/by Vaish Associates for defendant no.3.
----
CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM,J DATE : 5.12.2018 P.C.:-
1. Heard the counsel. The following issues are framed in the suit.
ISSUES (1) Whether plaintiffs prove that this court has jurisdiction to receive, try and dispose of the suit ? (2) Whether plaintiffs prove that the suit filed is within limitation ?
(3) Whether defendants prove that the suit is bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties ? (4) Whether plaintiffs prove that Plaintiff no.1 is entitled to the benefits of the Indenture dated 16th May 1969 ? (5) Whether plaintiffs prove that the agreement KJ ::: Uploaded on - 07/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2018 07:13:56 ::: 2/4 45.COMS33.17.doc contained in the Indenture dated 16th May 1969 and Clause 10(VI) thereof (Exhibit "B" to the Plaint) for sale and transfer of the Suit property described in Exhibit "A" to the plaint and revisionary and all other rights of Defendant no.3 therein at the rate of Rs.15/- per square yard of area of the suit property transferred to Defendant no.1 under Indenture of Conveyance dated 12th May 2013 (Exhibit "J" to the Plaint) is valid, subsisting and binding on the Defendants ?
(6) Whether Plaintiffs prove that they are entitled to the specific performance by Defendant No.1 and/or by Defendant no.3 of the Agreement contained in the Indenture dated 16th May 1969 (Exhibit "B" to the plaint) for conveyance of the suit property described in Exhibit "A" to the plaint and revisionary and all other rights therein to plaintiffs ?
(7) Whether plaintiffs prove that they are entitled to an order of cancellation of the Indenture of Conveyance dated 12th May 2013 (Exhibit "J" to the plaint) to the extent that it relates to the suit property ? (8) Whether Plaintiffs prove that they are entitled to KJ ::: Uploaded on - 07/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2018 07:13:56 ::: 3/4 45.COMS33.17.doc compensation from defendant nos.1 and 3 in the sum of Rs.2,99,60,250/- ?
(9) What decree ? What order ?
2. Parties are further directed as under :-
(a) File respective affidavit of documents and serve a copy thereof on the other side on or before 15.12.2018 ;
(b) On or before 22.12.2018 inspection to be given and Statement of admission and denial with reasons for denial to be exchanged ;
(c) Plaintiffs to file list of witnesses, affidavit in lieu of examination in chief together with compilation of documents and serve a copy thereof upon defendants by 17.1.2019.
3 It is made clear that if affidavits of documents are not filed and inspection given, parties will not be permitted to rely upon any documents, copies whereof are not annexed to the plaint and/or written statement or mentioned in the list of documents annexed to the plaint/written statement. This however, shall not prevent a party from confronting the witness of the other with any document.
If statements of admission and denial are not given within the time prescribed, parties shall be deemed to have admitted the existence of all the documents relied upon by the other side.
4 Stand over to 23.1.2019 for marking of
KJ
::: Uploaded on - 07/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2018 07:13:56 :::
4/4 45.COMS33.17.doc
documents/recording of evidence at which time plaintiff's 1st witness shall remain present in court.
(K.R.SHRIRAM,J) KJ ::: Uploaded on - 07/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2018 07:13:56 :::