Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Hero Cycles Limited vs M/S Hero Ecotech Limited . on 31 August, 2016
Bench: Ranjan Gogoi, Prafulla C. Pant
1
ITEM NO.4 COURT NO.6 SECTION XVI
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PETITION(S) FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (C) NO(S). 27778/2015
(ARISING OUT OF IMPUGNED FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 07/07/2015
IN MAN NO. 121/2015 PASSED BY THE HIGH COURT OF PATNA)
HERO CYCLES LIMITED & ANR. PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
M/S HERO ECOTECH LIMITED & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
[WITH APPLN.(S) FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS AND
INTERIM RELIEF AND OFFICE REPORT]
(FOR FINAL DISPOSAL)
Date : 31/08/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAFULLA C. PANT
For parties: Mr. Sudhir Chandra Agarwal, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Akhil Sibal, Adv.
Ms. Vidhi Goel, Adv.
Ms. Shagun Parashar, Adv.
Mr. Umesh Kumar Khaitan, Adv.
Mr. Hemant Singh, Adv.
Mr./Ms. Shashi Ojha, Adv.
Mr. Pranav Narain, Adv.
Ms. Ambika Gautam, Adv.
Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, Adv.
Mr. Amitabha Sen, Adv.
Ms. Aditi Pandey, Adv.
Ms. Shumaila Altaf, Adv.
Mr. Jatindar Pal Singh, Adv.
Mr. C.M. Lal,Adv.
Ms. Nancy Ray, Adv.
Ms. Suruchii Aggarwal, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
VINOD LAKHINA
Date: 2016.09.01
17:58:18 IST
Reason:
2
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Leave granted.
The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order. [VINOD LAKHINA] [ASHA SONI] COURT MASTER COURT MASTER [SIGNED ORDER IS PLACED ON THE FILE] 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.8478 OF 2016 [Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.27778/2015] HERO CYCLES LIMITED & ANR. ...APPELLANTS VERSUS M/S HERO ECOTECH LIMITED & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. The order of injunction granted by the learned trial Court, which was refused to be vacated on an application by the defendants, had been reversed in appeal by the High Court. Aggrieved, the plaintiffs are before this Court by means of this appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.
2
3. The order of injunction being an interlocutory order and the suit being presently pending the Court would feel constrained to embark upon a detailed consideration of the arguments and counter arguments advanced and to record findings therein as the same may prejudice either of the parties in the suit. However, having considered the relevant clauses of the Agreement dated 20th May, 2010 as well as the Business Realignment Agreement dated 31st January, 2010, we are of the view that the High Court fell into error in interfering with the order of the learned trial Court. We, therefore, set aside the order of the High Court and restore the order of injunction granted by the learned trial Court on the same terms. We request the learned trial Court to expedite the trial and complete the same as early as 3 possible uninfluenced by the terms of the present order.
4. The appeal is allowed in the above terms.
....................,J.
(RANJAN GOGOI) ...................,J. (PRAFULLA C. PANT) NEW DELHI AUGUST 31, 2016