K. VASUDEVA RAO Vs. K. LAKSHMINARAYANA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) O .A.Nos.143 and 144 of 2011 were filed by the applicants / plaintiffs seeking for the grant of an interim injunction restraining the respondents / defendants from preventing the participation of the first applicant in the business and affairs of the 12th respondent company and also for the grant of an interim injunction restraining the respondents 1 to 11 from in any manner dealing with the shares, properties of the 12th respondent more fully set out in the schedule to the petition, including but not limited to sale, transfer, merger, de-merger, mortgaging or otherwise encumbering of the said shares / properties.

(2.) THE applicants are the plaintiffs in the main suit. The suit is for the grant of various reliefs including declaration that the transfer of 12000 shares of the first applicant in the 12th defendant company, the details of which were mentioned in Schedule 'E', to the defendants 1 and 5 as null and void and for a direction to 1st and 5th defendants jointly and severally to pay the 1st plaintiff a sum of Rs.2 crores together with interest at 18% per annum towards refund of advance computed till the date of realization and also for a declaration that the 12th and 13th defendants are quasi partnerships and that their assets and businesses mentioned in Schedules A,B and D will be subject to dessolution and distribution equally between the first plaintiff, first and fifth defendants and legal heirs of late K.Shankar Rao, i.e., defendants 9 to 11 and for partition of the schedule mentioned properties and put the first plaintiff in exclusive possession of his 25% shares in the schedule mentioned properties.

(3.) IN the meanwhile, the defendants 3,4,7 and 8 have filed an application in A.No.3413 of 2011 to reject the plaint in terms of Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. Defendants 1,2, 5 and 6 have also filed an application in A.No.3460 of 2011 for the very same purpose. Defendants 9 to 11 have also filed an application in A.No.3876 of 2011 for the very same purpose. The plaintiffs have filed a common counter affidavit. Further, an application in A.No.941 of 2011 was also filed by the applicants / plaintiffs to appoint an independent chartered account to value the assets and properties of the 12th and 13th respondent companies as well as Schedule D properties mentioned in the plaint.