Bombay High Court
Brintons Carpets Asia Pvt Ltd vs Grentex And Company Pvt Ltd on 6 February, 2019
Author: K.R.Shriram
Bench: K.R.Shriram
1/3 71.COMS88.17.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION
COMMERCIAL SUIT NO.88 OF 2017
Grentex and Company Private Limited )....Plaintiff
V/s.
Brintons Carpets Asia Private Limited & Anr.)....Defendants
WITH
COMMERCIAL SUIT NO.316 OF 2016
Brintons Carpets Asia Pvt. Ltd. )....Plaintiff
V/s.
Grentex & Company Private Limited )....Defendants
----
Mr.Kunal Vaishav a/w Mr.Manish G.Varma and Ms.Surbhi Soni I/by Rahul Karnik for plaintiff in COMS 88 of 2017 and for defendants in COMS 316 of 2016.
Mr.Shyam Kapadia a/w Mr.Durgaprasad Poojari I/by Prompt Legal for defendant in COMS 88 of 2017 and for plaintiff in COMS 316 of 2016.
----
CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM,J DATE : 6.2.2019 P.C.:-
1. For convenience, the parties are referred to by their name-
Grentex Limited is referred to as (Grentex), Brintons Carpets Asia Pvt.
Ltd. (Brintons India) and Brintons Carpets Ltd. (Brintons).
2. Heard the counsel. By consent, the following issues are framed in both the suits.
KJ
::: Uploaded on - 11/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 16/03/2019 07:47:27 :::
2/3 71.COMS88.17.doc
ISSUES
(1) Whether Brintons India prove that the entire claim in this suit has been agitated by plaintiff in the UK proceeding that was initially filed by plaintiff, which has been dismissed and therefore, the same claim cannot be agitated again in this Court and the suit ought to be dismissed ?
(2) Whether Grentex in Commercial Suit No.88 of 2017 prove that all claims raised are within law of limitation ?
(3) Whether Grentex proves the Memorandum of Understanding dated 19th September 2012 is valid, binding and enforceable against both Brintons India and Brintons ?
(4) Whether Grentex proves that Brintons India and Brintons stopped/prevented Grentex from performing its obligations under the Memorandum of Understanding dated 19th September 2012 ?
(5) Whether Grentex proves it is entitled to a decree in the sum of GBP 14,84,234.91 equivalent to Rs.12,98,70,554.60 from Brintons India and Brintons, jointly and severally, together with interest thereon at 18% p.a. and for what period ?
(6) Whether Grentex proves that it incurred capital expenditure in the sum of Rs.6,55,18,684/- at the behest of Brintons India and Brintons and therefore, Brentex is entitled to a decree in the sum of Rs.6,55,18,684- against Brintons India and Brintons together with interest @ 18% p.a. and for what period ?
(7) Whether Grentex proves it is entitlled to a perpetual injunction against Brintons from enforcing the Order dated 14th September 2016 passed by His Honour Judge Waksman QC of the High Court of Justice Queen's Bench Division, The London Mercantile Court ?
(8) What order ? What decree ?
KJ
::: Uploaded on - 11/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 16/03/2019 07:47:27 :::
3/3 71.COMS88.17.doc
3. Parties are further directed as under :-
(a) On or before 20.2.2019 inspection of documents to be given, failing which, parties will not be permitted to rely upon any documents. This, however, shall not prevent a party from confronting the witness of the other with any document;
(b) On or before 27.2.2019, statement of admission and denial with reasons for denial to be exchanged failing which parties shall be deemed to have admitted the existence of all the documents relied upon by the other side ;
(c) On or before 15.3.2019, Grentex to file list of witnesses, affidavit in lieu of examination in chief together with compilation of documents and serve a copy thereof upon Brintons India and Brintons, failing which Commercial Suit No.88 of 2017 shall stand dismissed without reference to this court.
4. Stand over to 20.3.2019 for marking of documents/recording of evidence at which time Grentex's witness shall remain present in court.
(K.R.SHRIRAM,J) KJ ::: Uploaded on - 11/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 16/03/2019 07:47:27 :::