INDEC EQUIPMENT PRIVATE LTD Vs. SARAF ENTERPRISES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD.

(2.) ADMIT. Heard forthwith by consent.

(3.) THOUGH the impugned judgment and order is sought to be challenged on various grounds, it is not necessary to address to all those issues and suffice to refer only one point relating to the failure on the part of learned Single Judge to consider that the provisions of Order VIII, Rule X of the Code of Civil Procedure are not applicable to the suit filed on the Original Side in this Court. The law on this point is well settled by the decision of this Court in the matter Iridium India Telecom Ltd. Vs. Motorola Inc, reported in 2004 (1) Mah. LJ 532 and affirmed by Supreme Court in Iridium India Telecom Ltd. Vs. Motorola Inc, reported in 2005 (2) Supreme Court Cases 145 and further by the decisions of the Division Bench in the matter of Tardeo Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Bank of Baroda, reported in 2007 (5) Bom.C.R.557 and All India Central Bank Employees Congress and ors. vs. Central Bank of India reported in 2007 (5) Bom.C.R. 835. There is a specific procedure prescribed under the Original Side Rules framed by this Court which are required to be followed in such suits filed under Original Side of this Court. Admittedly the said procedure has not been followed in the case in hand.