Maya Appliances Private Limited vs M/S.Pigeon Appliances Pvt. … on 31 July, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 31.07.2008 

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH

O.S.A.NOS.207 TO 209 OF 2004

			
Maya Appliances Private Limited
No.2 (Old No.8) Boat Club,
I Avenue,
Chennai-600 028
represented by Durairajan
General Manager				..  Appellant


	Vs.


1.M/s.Pigeon Appliances Pvt. Limited,
  No27, First Floor,
  Mallige Complex,
  Subramanyapura Road,
  Chickalasandra,
  Bangalore-560 061
  represented by its Director
  Rajendra J Gandhi

2.M/s.Vardhman Enterprises,
  No.27, First Floor,
  Mallige Complex,
  Subramanyapura Road,
  Chickalasandra,
  Bangalore-560 061
  represented by its Director
  Rajendra J Gandhi.

3.M/s.Stovekraft Pvt. Limited,
  No.28/1, Adjacent to AJS Layout,
  Third Main Road,
  Uttarahalil Hobli,
  Bangalore-560 061
  represented by its
  Managing Director
  Rajendra J Gandhi					.. Respondents
 	
	These O.S.As have been preferred under Order XXXVI Rule 1 of O.S. Rules and Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order of the learned Single Judge made in O.A.No.487 of 2004, A.No.2158 of 2004 and O.A.No.488 of 2004 in C.S.No.460 of 2004, dated 18.8.2004 respectively.   
	For Appellant  :  Mr.N.Surya Senthil

	For Respondents:  Mr.Suresh Golecha

	   
- - - - 

COMMON JUDGMENT

(The judgment of the Court was made by M.CHOCKALINGAM, J.)		
	These appeals challenge the dismissal of applications for interim injunction and the application for appointment of Advocate Commissioner, pending suit in C.S.No.460 of 2004.
	2.The Court heard the learned counsel on either side. At the time when the arguments are advanced, the Court is of the considered opinion that since the matter is pending for the past four years in the hands of the learned Single Judge, it would be fit and proper to keep the merits of the matter left open to be agitated by the parties at the time of trial by adducing evidence both oral and documentary. Accordingly, keeping it open for the parties to urge their respective contentions on the merits of matter before the learned Single Judge, these appeals are disposed of.  No costs. 

							(M.C., J.) (R.P.S., J.)								31.07.2008
Index : Yes
Internet : Yes
vvk
							M.CHOCKALINGAM, J.

AND

R.SUBBIAH, J.

vvk

O.S.A.NOS.207 TO 209/2004

31.07.2008