GOOMO ORBIT CORPORATE AND LEISURE TRAVELS (I) PRIVATE LIMITED AND ORS. Vs. G.I. RETAIL PRIVATE LIMITED AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These applications have been filed to revoke the leave granted by this Court by Order dated 12.07.2019 in A.No.1956 of 2019

(2.) The brief facts leading to the filing of this application is as follows : The respondent/plaintiff has filed the the suit for the following reliefs as against the defendants : a. The plaintiff seeks permanent injunction restraining the defendants and/or their agents, representatives or servants from representing that the plaintiff or its shareholders/Directors had made any profit/earn out from the sale of share of Hermes, other than that pursuant to the Share Purchase Agreements (SPA) entered into between the plaintiff and the third defendant dated 07th September 2015. b. The plaintiff is also seeking mandatory injunction directing the defendant No.2 to withdraw the statements made to the public, with respect to the purchase of the shares of Hermes, and to place the correct factual position with respect to the same. c. The plaintiff is also seeking a damages against the said defendant Nos.1 to 6, jointly and severally, to pay a sum of INR 40 crores or for any higher amount due to the defamatory and malicious act on their part. d. Costs of the suit.

(3.) The entire allegation is with regard to the sale of the shares of the first defendant's company. It is stated in the plaint that out of the sale of the shares by the second and third defendants, the plaintiff nor its shareholders have secured any profit or earn out from the said transaction. Despite the above fact, the second defendant is making misrepresentation to the public. It is also stated in the plaint that the cause of action arose in the present suit arose where the situs and transfer of shares took place and the second defendant executed the share purchase agreement and subsequently when the defendants gave the press statements regarding the acquisition of Hermes and thereafter, on the dates when the emails were exchanged between the plaintiff and the defendants 2 to 5. Thereafter, the plaintiff bank also wrote an email on 12.09.2018. It is stated that a part of cause of action has arose for maintaining the present suit before this Court.