PUNNAMANA AGENCIES Vs. MARUBENI CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Plaintiff, M/s. Punnamana Agencies as per the paragraph-1 of the plaint is a partnership firm and Mr. P.V. Kumar, who has instituted, filed and verified the plaint, is one of it's partners.

(2.) M/s Marubeni Corp. is the defendant No.1 to the said suit. Mr. T. Tomota, Mr. H. Nakamura and Mr. Y. Sanada are defendant Nos. 2, 3 and 4. There is no specific order that the defendant nos. 2, 3 and 4 have been proceeded against ex parte but none has been appearing for the said defendants and they have not adduced any evidence. Defendant no.1 has also not led any oral evidence.

(3.) The cause title of the plaint states that the suit is for specific performance. However in the prayer clause the plaintiff has prayed for a decree of money for a sum of Rupees 32 lacs being the amount due and payable by the defendants in terms of the contract. The plaintiff has also claimed pendente lite and future interest as well as costs. Counsel for the plaintiff states that the present suit is one for recovery of money and should be treated as such in view of the prayer clause in the suit. I accept the statement of counsel for the plaintiff that the present suit is for recovery of money with pendente lite and future interest.