9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (1) TMI 946X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tes ORDER 16.01.2013 I.As. 8586/2008 and 9068/2008 IN CS(OS) 1392/2008 While the first application being I.A. No. 8586/2008 has been filed by the plaintiff under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, the second application being I.A. No. 9068/2008 has been filed by the defendants under Order 39 Rule 4 CPC. On 15th May, 2009, an Agreement was executed between the parties. The relevant portion of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e parties. Copy of this agreement has been placed on record. Counsel appearing for both the parties jointly submit that the interim order passed by this Court on 28.07.2008 may be modified in terms of interim arrangement contained in the above referred agreement dated 15.05.2009 and this modification, according to them, should hold good till the decision of these applications relating to interim r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Division Bench in appeals arising out of the said orders has held that the plaintiff is not entitled to an injunction as prayed for. Consequently, plaintiff`s application being I.A. 8586/2008 is dismissed. CS(OS) 1392/2008 However, as this Court is informed that the Division Bench`s judgment has been challenged before the Supreme Court, the plaintiff is granted liberty to file a fresh app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
