9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (12) TMI 1778 - HC - Companies LawCustody and transportation of Metro Rails which are manufactured by EVRAZ East Metals AG - HELD THAT - Defendant RRC agree and undertake that 3278.7 MT (18 Meter rails) and 253.14 MT (25 Meter Metro Rails) of Metro rails presently lying with them in their warehouse (in good condition) would be given delivery of to the Plaintiff LSI. Defendant RRC states that 250.35 MT of 18 meter Metro Rails are in transit from Mumbai to Nagpur and will reach MAHA METRO site in Nagpur within 7 days from today. Upon such delivery, RRC will hand over to LSI the MAHA METRO delivery receipt for the said 250.35 MT rails. Defendant RRC agree and undertake to handover 15 clamps as specified in the contract. The matters will be taken up for hearing on 15th January, 2018 when this Court will consider all claims, contentions and submissions of all parties, inter alia, including on the following issues a. Whether any security should be furnished for the amounts claimed by RRC? b. Which party should furnish the security, if any? c. What is the amount for which the security should be furnished?
Issues involved:
1. Dispute over custody and transportation of Metro Rails 2. Termination of contract by Plaintiff 3. Jurisdiction of the Court 4. Timely delivery of Metro Rails 5. Relief sought by both Plaintiffs 6. Interim orders for delivery of Metro Rails 7. Security for amounts claimed Issue 1: Dispute over custody and transportation of Metro Rails The judgment revolves around the dispute concerning the custody and transportation of Metro Rails manufactured by East Metals AG for delivery to MAHA METRO. The Plaintiff was appointed to ship the rails from Russia to Nagpur, and the transport was entrusted to the Defendant. However, due to delays, the contract was terminated, leading to legal actions between the parties. Issue 2: Termination of contract by Plaintiff The Plaintiff terminated the contract due to the undelivered Metro Rails and filed a suit seeking immediate delivery from the Defendant. Simultaneously, the Defendant filed a suit challenging the termination and claiming damages. The timely delivery of the rails was crucial as MAHA METRO had set a deadline for the completion of the project. Issue 3: Jurisdiction of the Court The Defendant raised a preliminary issue regarding the jurisdiction of the Court under Section 9A of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908, which was resolved in favor of the Court having jurisdiction over the matter. Issue 4: Timely delivery of Metro Rails The urgency of delivering the Metro Rails to MAHA METRO by the specified deadline was emphasized to avoid project delays of national importance. The Court highlighted the consequences of further delays, stressing the need for prompt action to fulfill the contractual obligations. Issue 5: Relief sought by both Plaintiffs Both Plaintiffs sought reliefs against each other, which needed to be considered and resolved promptly to avoid project disruptions. The Court acknowledged the importance of addressing the ongoing disputes and ensuring the delivery of the rails to MAHA METRO without further delays. Issue 6: Interim orders for delivery of Metro Rails To address the immediate need for the delivery of Metro Rails, the Court passed interim orders requiring the Defendant to deliver specific quantities of rails to the Plaintiff within a specified timeframe. The parties were directed to cooperate in the transportation process to ensure timely delivery to MAHA METRO. Issue 7: Security for amounts claimed The Court outlined future considerations regarding the security to be furnished for the amounts claimed by the Defendant, raising questions about the party responsible for providing security, the amount to be secured, and other related matters. The Order passed was without prejudice to the claims and contentions of all parties involved, keeping the issues open for further examination. This detailed judgment by the Bombay High Court addressed various legal aspects of the dispute, emphasizing the importance of timely delivery of Metro Rails and the need for cooperation between the parties to resolve the issues effectively. The Court's interim orders aimed to facilitate the transportation process while ensuring the protection of the parties' rights and interests, setting the stage for further hearings to address the remaining issues comprehensively.
|
