RAJEEV GAMBHIR Vs. JINDAL POLY FILMS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This first appeal from order is preferred by the plaintiff/appellants challenging the validity and correctness of the order dated 24.12.2012, passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bulandshahr in Original Suit No. 185 of 2011 whereby the application for ad interim injunction filed by plaintiffs-appellants had been rejected on merits.

(2.) Briefly culled out the facts of the case are that the plaintiff/appellants filed O.S. No. 185 of 20011 on 24.5.2011 before the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bulandshahr for permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendant/respondent alleging that they are engaged in the business of sale and purchase of dismantled equipments of old and obsolete industries. The defendant/respondent, a company registered under the Companies Act, formerly known as Jindal Polyster had a factory, which had stopped functioning as such its machinery had become old and obsolete, therefore, the management had taken a decision to dismantle it and to sell its dismantled plant, machinery, equipment and structure etc. The plaintiff/appellants on coming to know about the said decision of the defendant/respondents contacted them. It was agreed between them that the plaintiffs/appellants would dismantle the plant, machinery, equipment and structure etc and after removal purchase the same for a consideration of Rs. 35 crores. The defendant authorized Sri Rajeev Gambhir, Director of M/s Raveesh Steel Rolling and Forging Pvt. Ltd. situated at B-8 Mayapuri Industrial Area, Phase-1, New Delhi, vide letter dated 14.5.2010. For this purpose the letter dated 14.5.2010 reads thus :

(3.) Sri S.P. Gupta, learned Senior Counsel for the appellants has placed the averments of the plaint before us and submitted that the plaintiff/appellants have categorically asserted therein that inspite of the letter dated 14.5.2010, the defendants did not allow the plaintiff to pursue their work despite several requests; plaintiff/appellants in order to fulfill the condition of defendants paid them Rs. one crore through the account of M/s D.D. Forging Pvt. Ltd, plaintiff/appellant no. 3 on 4.12.2010, thereafter the plaintiff/appellants were allowed to carry on dismantling work w. e. f. January, 2011. It was also in January, 2011 that it came to the knowledge of plaintiff/appellants that some of the equipments of the defendants industry worth Rs. Five crores were transferred to its Nasik Unit after 14.5.2010 and it would be adjusted in the sum of Rs. 35 crores.