KLG SYSTEL LTD Vs. OPERATION TECHNOLOGY INC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS an application filed by the plaintiff under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, by which plaintiff has prayed that defendants be restrained from initiating or prosecuting or pursing any proceedings against the plaintiff outside India with regard to the subject matter of the suit. Summons were issued in the suit on 25.01.2011. After service defendant entered appearance on 09.02.2011 when learned senior counsel for the defendant informed the Court that the defendant had already filed a suit in the Court at California on 26.01.2011. Leaned senior counsel for the defendant on instructions had also made a statement that defendant shall not take any further action in that suit till the next date of hearing before this court. The statement made by the counsel continues till date.

(2.) WHILE counsel for the plaintiff submits that the application be allowed and the interim order dated 09.02.2011 be confirmed, the present application is opposed by counsel for the defendant.

(3.) MR .Goel, learned senior counsel for the plaintiff submits that the plaintiff was shocked to learn that the defendant has incorporated a hundred per cent subsidiary company in India by the name of ETAP Automation Pvt. Ltd. on 23.12.2009 with a view to by-pass the plaintiff and with a view to ride on the efforts and achievements of the plaintiff. Mr.Goel, also submits that in the year 2008 due to global recession the attitude of the defendant took a sharp turn and the defendant started hinting that the commission as agreed between the parties be reduced. This was opposed by the plaintiff.