Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2021 (2) TMI 926

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ion in respect thereof. Admittedly, the plaintiff had paid a sum of ₹ 14,06,70,000/- to the defendant. Apparently, the parties had fallen out of the contract. The parties have claimed differently with regard to the termination of the contract. According to the plaintiff, it has originally terminated the contract and the defendant is obliged to refund the entirety of the consideration advanced along with interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum. According to the defendant, the termination effected by the plaintiff has been premature therefore entitling the defendant to deduct amounts stipulated in the contract. According to the defendant, it has to pay a sum of ₹ 12,81,22,349/- to the plaintiff after deduction as claimed. Th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppearing for the plaintiff has submitted that, the plaintiff is not pressing for an order of attachment before the judgment at this stage. He has limited the prayers of the application to a prayer for injunction only. 3. Learned Advocate appearing for the plaintiff has submitted that, the parties agreed that the defendant will construct and sell three flats to the plaintiff. By reason of such agreement, the plaintiff had from time to time paid a sum of ₹ 14,06,70,000/-. The plaintiff had thereafter found that the defendant was not performing its part of the obligations. The plaintiff had terminated the agreement and called upon the defendant to refund the principal amount along with interest thereon. The defendant had claimed that, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . Referring to the averments made in the application and relying upon All India Reporter 2009 Calcutta (Sunil Kakrania Ors. v. M/s. Saltee Infrastructure Ltd. Anr.) learned Senior Advocate appearing for the defendant has submitted that, the plaintiff is neither entitled to an order of attachment nor an order of injunction. He has submitted that, the flats were agreed to be handed over in May, 2020. Prior to the expiry of time for handing over the flats, the plaintiff had unilaterally terminated the contract. Under the Contract, the defendant is entitled to deduct money from out of the consideration paid by the plaintiff in the event of premature termination of the contract at the behest of the plaintiff. He has submitted that, the p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l Kakrania Ors. (supra). After reviewing the various authorities on the subject, it has observed as follows :- 49. In Chinese Tannery Owners' Association (supra) the Calcutta High Court was examining an interim order of injunction that had been granted in favour of the plaintiff in a suit for money decree. The defendant appellant raised the plea that the provisions of order 39 Rule 1 of the Code was not applicable and the Civil Court could not have invoked its inherent power under Section 151 of the Code. The Division Bench held that the mere fact that there are certain provisions as regards the issue of injunctions in Order 39 of the Code does not debar the Court from passing temporary injunctions for doing justice in the exercise .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the aforesaid provisions, it can be safely stated that the court has inherent power to pass an order of injunction or attachment upon an unimpeachable liquidated claim being demonstrated and upon it being established that the respondents are taking steps to improperly deny the realization of the claim. 10. In the facts of the present case, the plaintiff has claimed a decree for a sum in excess of ₹ 81 crores on the basis of an agreement under which, the defendant was to construct and deliver flats to the plaintiff. The ultimate agreement between the parties, had obliged the defendant to construct and make over unit Nos. 12W, 13W and 14W located on the 12th, 13th and 14th floor on the proposed building Wellside Camac to be cons .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates