BANDEKAR BROTHERS PRIVATE LTD Vs. V G QUENIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted. These appeals are filed against the final judgment and order dated 14-12-2009 passed by the High Court of Bombay at Goa in Bandekar Bros. (P) Ltd. v. V.G. Quenim, WP No. 600 of 2009, order dated 14-12-2009 (Bom) filed by the appellants herein whereby the High Court disposed of all the writ petitions remanding the matter back to the trial court for de novo consideration of the applications being CMAs Nos. 26 of 2007 to 29/2007/A and CMAs Nos. 31 of 2007 to 34/2007/A filed by the appellants herein in Special Civil Suits Nos. 7, 8, 14 & 21/2000/A respectively.

(2.) M/s Bandekar Brothers (P) Ltd. filed three suits against the respondents herein, for recovering money, being Special Civil Suit No. 7/2000/A on 8-2-2000 for a suit claim of Rs 91,89,973.50 and for further interest against the hiring of services; Special Civil Suit No. 14/2000/A on 31-3-2000 for a suit claim of Rs 2,65,71,705 and for further interest against the transactions of iron ore taken on loan/returnable basis by Respondent 1; Special Civil Suit No. 21/2000/A on 9-6-2000 for a net suit claim of Rs 2,98,58,668.49 for further interest being the dues against the transactions of exchange of ore taken place between the parties. M/s Vasantram Mehta & Co. (P) Ltd., a sister concern of M/s Bandekar Bros. (P) Ltd. filed a civil suit being Special Civil Suit No. 8/2000/A on 17-2-2000 against the respondents for a suit claim of Rs 7,40,405.83 and for further interest against the hiring of services. With the said four civil suits, the respective appellants also filed applications seeking ad interim/interim reliefs being CMAs Nos. 19, 50, 26, 60, 99 and 160/2000/A respectively.

(3.) In CMA No. 19/2000/A in Special Civil Suit No. 7/2000/A, the Civil Judge by order dated 9-2-2000 restrained the respondent Company from creating further interest in the iron ore lying at its Kudnem Stockyard at Kudnem. On 10-3-2000, the respondents, under the written statement, denied having had any transactions of loan and exchange of ore with the appellants and in turn filed a counterclaim by issuing a fabricated debit note dated 9-3-2000 for Rs 1,88,27,796 claiming to have supplied 51,416.800 WMT of ore to them on sale basis until June 1999.