{"id":181884,"date":"2005-02-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-02-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005"},"modified":"2015-11-01T21:30:21","modified_gmt":"2015-11-01T16:00:21","slug":"ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005","title":{"rendered":"M\/S.Blue Blends (India) Limited vs Thirumagal Mills Limited on 15 February, 2005"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">M\/S.Blue Blends (India) Limited vs Thirumagal Mills Limited on 15 February, 2005<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS           \n\nDATED: 15\/02\/2005  \n\nCORAM   \n\nTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.KANAGARAJ         \n\nCRL RC.No.1776 OF 2004    \nAND CRL RC NOS. 1777 TO 1780 OF 2004      \nCRL.M.P.Nos.10641, 10645, 10647, 10649 AND 10650 OF 2004.      \n\n1. M\/s.Blue Blends (India) Limited,\n   JBF House, Old Post Office Lane,\n   Kalbadevi Road,\n   Mumbai-400 002. \n\n2. Anand Arya                           ... Petitioners in all\n                                        the above Crl.R.Cs.\n\n-Vs-\n\nThirumagal Mills Limited,\nKatpadi Road, \nGudiyatham, \nrep.by its Accounts Manager \nS.Ramamurthy                                    ... Respondent in all<\/pre>\n<p>                                                    the above Crl.R.Cs.\n<\/p>\n<p>        Criminal Revision  Cases  filed  under  Section  397  r\/w.401  Cr.P.C.<br \/>\npraying for the reliefs as stated therein.\n<\/p>\n<pre>For petitioners        :  Mr.S.Sridhar\n\nFor respondent :  Mr.Ashok Kumar, \n                Senior Counsel for\n                M\/s.A.Sasidharan &amp;\n                C.D.Johnson\n\n:COMMON ORDER      \n\n<\/pre>\n<p>        All  the  above  Criminal Revision Cases are filed by one and the same<br \/>\nparties as against the same respondent against the orders all  dated  6.7.2004<br \/>\nrespectively   made   in  Crl.M.P.No.1535  of  2004  in  C.C.No.192  of  1998,<br \/>\nCrl.M.P.No.1534 of 2004 in C.C.No.187 of 1998, Crl.M.P.No.15  31  of  2004  in<br \/>\nC.C.No.188  of  1998,  Crl.M.P.No.1527  of  2004  in  C.C.No.1  91 of 1998 and<br \/>\nCrl.M.P.No.1530 of 2004 in  C.C.No.190  of  1998  by  the  Court  of  Judicial<br \/>\nMagistrate, Gudiyatham.\n<\/p>\n<p>        2.   On  a  perusal of the materials placed on record and upon hearing<br \/>\nthe learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned senior counsel for the<br \/>\nrespondent, it comes to be known that the respondent herein has lodged all the<br \/>\nabove mentioned criminal cases as  against  the  petitioners  herein  for  the<br \/>\noffence under  Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.  During pendency<br \/>\nof the said cases, the revision petitioners herein who are accused in all  the<br \/>\nabove  cases  have  filed the above mentioned criminal miscellaneous petitions<br \/>\nbefore the Court below seeking to re-call the process issued in the cases  and<br \/>\ndischarge  them  from  the cases on ground that the respondent\/complainant has<br \/>\nreceived  all  the  amounts  due  from  the  revision  petitioners  and   also<br \/>\nacknowledged  the  same  by  issuing  receipts  and  that  the accused and the<br \/>\ncomplainant entered into a compromise.\n<\/p>\n<p>        3.  This claim of the accused  was  rebutted  by  the  complainant  on<br \/>\nground that the points raised by the accused are all the matters to be decided<br \/>\nduring  the  course of trial; that the payments received from the accused were<br \/>\ncredited to the accounts of the accused maintained by the complainant  and  no<br \/>\nreceipt  has been issued referring to the cases pending before the Court; that<br \/>\nthe accused made the payment knowing full well that the same were made against<br \/>\nthe outstanding payments payable to the complainant on  account  of  the  yarn<br \/>\nsupplied  by  the  complainant  which  include  bank changes, belated interest<br \/>\npayments as per the contract of supply of goods; that even  all  the  receipts<br \/>\nissued  by the complainant specifically states that the payments were received<br \/>\ntowards account balance and not towards the cheque  amounts  involved  in  the<br \/>\ncases,  the petitions filed by the accused are without merit and are liable to<br \/>\nbe dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>        4.  Based on the  above  pleadings,  the  Court  below  would  conduct<br \/>\nseparate  enquiries  into  the  matters and would dismiss all the petitions on<br \/>\nground that the points raised by the accused are all points to  be  determined<br \/>\nat the  time  of  trial  of  the cases.  It is only aggrieved against the said<br \/>\nfindings of the Court below, the petitioners\/accused have come forward to file<br \/>\nthe above criminal revision cases on certain grounds as brought forth  in  the<br \/>\ngrounds of revision petitions.\n<\/p>\n<p>        5.   During  arguments,  the learned counsel for the petitioners would<br \/>\nsubmit that the entire amount in dispute has been paid by the accused  to  the<br \/>\ncomplainant   and   the  respondent\/complainant  can,  no  more,  enforce  the<br \/>\nliability; that the court below has failed to note that if the complainant  is<br \/>\ndesirous  of prosecuting the complaints further, he ought not to have received<br \/>\nthe payments to the tune of Rs.81,09,278\/= over and above the amount of  Rs.75<br \/>\nlakhs  in respect of alleged dishonoured cheques in all the complaints and the<br \/>\nrespondent having received the huge amount from the petitioners, in  order  to<br \/>\nharass  and humiliate the petitioners, is not withdrawing the complaints; that<br \/>\nthe Court below has failed to note that the Amendment Act 2002 to Chapter XVII<br \/>\nNegotiable  Instruments   Act   1881   through   Sec.147   provides   that   &#8216;<br \/>\nnotwithstanding  anything  contained  in  the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973,<br \/>\nevery offence punishable under this Act shall be compoundable&#8217;  and  the  said<br \/>\namendment  applied to the present complaint filed against the petitioner also.<br \/>\nOn such grounds, the petitioners would pray for the reliefs as stated supra.\n<\/p>\n<p>        6.  On the contrary,  on  the  part  of  the  learned  senior  counsel<br \/>\nappearing  on  behalf  of  the respondent\/complainant, besides reiterating the<br \/>\ncontents of the counter filed before the Court below,  he  would  submit  that<br \/>\nsince  the  payment  of  the  amounts as alleged by the petitioners\/accused is<br \/>\nitself in dispute, the Court below has rightly concluded that the trial is the<br \/>\nanswer for all the issues to be settled after adducing evidence on both sides.<br \/>\nAt this stage, the learned senior counsel for  the  respondent  would  cite  a<br \/>\njudgment of  the Honourable Apex Court delivered in <a href=\"\/doc\/549946\/\">ADALAT PRASAD vs.  ROOPLAL<br \/>\nJINDAL AND OTHERS<\/a> reported in 2004 (4) CTC 608  wherein  the  Honourable  Apex<br \/>\nCourt has held:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;&#8230;   after  taking cognizance of the complaint and examining the complainant<br \/>\nand the witnesses if he (the Magistrate) is satisfied that there is sufficient<br \/>\nground to proceed with the complaint, he can issue process by way  of  summons<br \/>\nunder Section  204  of  the Code.  Therefore, what is necessary or a condition<br \/>\nprecedent for issuing process under Section 204 is  the  satisfaction  of  the<br \/>\nMagistrate  either  by  examination of the complainant and the witnesses or by<br \/>\nthe inquiry contemplated under Section 202 that there is sufficient ground for<br \/>\nproceeding with the complaint hence issue the process under Section 204 of the<br \/>\nCode.  In none of these stages the Code has provided for hearing the  summoned<br \/>\naccused,  for obvious reasons because this is only a preliminary stage and the<br \/>\nstage of hearing of the  accused  would  only  arise  at  a  subsequent  stage<br \/>\nprovided for  in the latter provision in the Code.  It is true as held by this<br \/>\nCourt in Mathew&#8217;s case (1992 (1) SCC 217)  before  issuance  of  summons,  the<br \/>\nMagistrate  should be satisfied that there is sufficient ground for proceeding<br \/>\nwith the complaint but that satisfaction is to be arrived at  by  the  inquiry<br \/>\nconducted  by  him  as  contemplated  under Sections 200 and 202, and the only<br \/>\nstage of dismissal of the complaint arises under Section 203 of  the  Code  at<br \/>\nwhich  stage  the  accused  has  no role to play therefore the question of the<br \/>\naccused on receipt of summons approaching the Court and making an  application<br \/>\nfor  dismissal  of  the  complaint  under  Section  203  of  the  code  for  a<br \/>\nreconsideration of the material available on record is  impermissible  because<br \/>\nby  then  Section 203 is already over and the Magistrate has proceeded further<br \/>\nto Section 204 stage.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>        7.  The learned senior counsel for the respondent would also cite  yet<br \/>\nanother  judgment  of  the  Honourable  Apex  Court  delivered  in <a href=\"\/doc\/1318639\/\">SUBRAMANIUM<br \/>\nSETHURAMAN vs.  STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER<\/a> reported in 2004 (4) CTC  613<br \/>\nwherein the Honourable Apex Court has held :\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Recalling  process  after  recording  of  plea of accused is not permitted in<br \/>\nsummons case and remedy if any can be by way of petition under Section 482  of<br \/>\nthe Code of Criminal Procedure&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>On such arguments, the learned senior counsel for the respondent would pray to<br \/>\ndismiss all the above criminal revision cases.\n<\/p>\n<p>        8.   A perusal of the orders passed by the Court below would show that<br \/>\nthe Court below, having conducted enquiries into all the matters  and  tracing<br \/>\nall  the  facts and circumstances of the cases and having framed its own point<br \/>\nfor consideration in all the matters to the effect that &#8216;whether the  petition<br \/>\nfor review and recall of process issued against the accused could be allowed?&#8217;<br \/>\nand  relying  on  various propositions of law delivered by the upper forums of<br \/>\nlaw on the subject, would hold that a prima facie case has been  made  out  on<br \/>\nthe  part  of  the  complainant  and  that  when  the offence is complete, the<br \/>\nsubsequent negotiation that the accused would settle the claim, would,  in  no<br \/>\nway,  frustrate  the  operation  of  law  and  the  onus  is on the accused to<br \/>\nestablish that the said amounts were given towards the discharge of  liability<br \/>\nin  respect  of  the cheque amount, which has not been done by the accused and<br \/>\nthat even though the payment has been made, the subsequent payments would  not<br \/>\nabsolve the  accused  of  the  liability of criminal offence.  The Court below<br \/>\nwould further hold that the points raised by the accused cannot be decided  at<br \/>\nthis stage and the entire matter could be considered only during the course of<br \/>\ntrial  as  the  entire facts of the case would be revealed only through a full<br \/>\ntrial.  The Court below would  further  observe  that  the  accused  have  not<br \/>\nproduced  any  reliable document in support of their case and would ultimately<br \/>\ndismiss all the petitions filed by the accused.\n<\/p>\n<p>        9.  Either in the conclusions arrived at by the  court  below  or  the<br \/>\nmanner in which the same have been arrived at, this Court of revision does not<br \/>\nfind any illegality or perversity in approach or patent error of law and since<br \/>\nthe  points  raised  on  the  part of the accused are the points to be decided<br \/>\nafter a thorough and full trial, in which event both the parties could exhaust<br \/>\ntheir remedies, the Court below has correctly arrived  at  the  conclusion  to<br \/>\ndismiss all  the  above  petitions.    The  judgments cited on the part of the<br \/>\nlearned senior counsel for the respondent would squarely apply to the facts of<br \/>\nthe cases in hand.  Therefore, the interference of this  Court  sought  to  be<br \/>\nmade  into the well considered and merited orders passed by the Court below is<br \/>\nneither necessary nor warranted and hence  all  the  above  criminal  revision<br \/>\ncases are liable only to be dismissed and hence the following order:\n<\/p>\n<p>In result,\n<\/p>\n<p>(i)  all  the  above  criminal  revision cases do not merit acceptance and are<br \/>\nliable only to be dismissed and are dismissed accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p>(ii) The orders all dated 6.7.2004 respectively made in  Crl.M.P.No.15  35  of<br \/>\n2004  in  C.C.No.192  of  1998, Crl.M.P.No.1534 of 2004 in C.C.No.187 of 1998,<br \/>\nCrl.M.P.No.1531 of 2004 in C.C.No.188 of 1998, Crl.M.P.  No.1527  of  2004  in<br \/>\nC.C.No.191  of  1998  and Crl.M.P.No.1530 of 2004 in C.C.No.190 of 1998 by the<br \/>\nCourt of Judicial Magistrate, Gudiyatham are confirmed.\n<\/p>\n<p>        Consequently, Crl.M.P.Nos.10641, 10645, 10647, 10649 and 10650  of  20<br \/>\n04 are also dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>Index:  Yes<\/p>\n<p>Internet:  Yes<\/p>\n<p>Rao <\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>The Judicial Magistrate,<br \/>\nGudiyatham.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court M\/S.Blue Blends (India) Limited vs Thirumagal Mills Limited on 15 February, 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 15\/02\/2005 CORAM THE HON&#8217;BLE MR.JUSTICE V.KANAGARAJ CRL RC.No.1776 OF 2004 AND CRL RC NOS. 1777 TO 1780 OF 2004 CRL.M.P.Nos.10641, 10645, 10647, 10649 AND 10650 OF 2004. 1. M\/s.Blue Blends (India) [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-181884","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>M\/S.Blue Blends (India) Limited vs Thirumagal Mills Limited on 15 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S.Blue Blends (India) Limited vs Thirumagal Mills Limited on 15 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2005-02-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-11-01T16:00:21+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S.Blue Blends (India) Limited vs Thirumagal Mills Limited on 15 February, 2005\",\"datePublished\":\"2005-02-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-01T16:00:21+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005\"},\"wordCount\":1691,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S.Blue Blends (India) Limited vs Thirumagal Mills Limited on 15 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2005-02-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-01T16:00:21+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S.Blue Blends (India) Limited vs Thirumagal Mills Limited on 15 February, 2005\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"M\/S.Blue Blends (India) Limited vs Thirumagal Mills Limited on 15 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S.Blue Blends (India) Limited vs Thirumagal Mills Limited on 15 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2005-02-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-11-01T16:00:21+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S.Blue Blends (India) Limited vs Thirumagal Mills Limited on 15 February, 2005","datePublished":"2005-02-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-01T16:00:21+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005"},"wordCount":1691,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005","name":"M\/S.Blue Blends (India) Limited vs Thirumagal Mills Limited on 15 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2005-02-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-01T16:00:21+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-blue-blends-india-limited-vs-thirumagal-mills-limited-on-15-february-2005#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S.Blue Blends (India) Limited vs Thirumagal Mills Limited on 15 February, 2005"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/181884","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=181884"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/181884\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=181884"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=181884"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=181884"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}