QUIBUS RESOURCES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. R THARANI
LAWS(MAD)-2012-9-61
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Decided on September 11,2012

QUIBUS RESOURCES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Appellant
VERSUS
R THARANI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Animadverting upon the judgment and decree dated 06.06.2011 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No.III), City Civil Court, Chennai in O.S.No.6713 of 2010, this appeal is focussed.
(2.) The parties, for convenience sake, are referred to here under according to their litigative status and ranking before the trial court.
(3.) Compendiously and concisely, the germane facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of this appeal, would run thus: a] The appellant herein/the plaintiff filed the suit seeking the following reliefs: To pass a judgment and decree in favour of the plaintiff as follows: - directing the defendants to jointly and severally pay a sum of Rs.11,00,000/- (Rupees eleven lakhs only) towards loss and damages, together with future interest at the rate of 18% per annum from thed ate of suit till date of realisation in full; - granting a permanent mandatory injunction restraining and forbearing the defendants their men servants or agents or any other person claiming through or under them from interfering with the operation of the generator installed by the plaintiff in the suit premises and thereby interfering and obstructing the day today functioning of the plaintiff and for costs of the suit. b) The defendants filed the written statement with counter claim seeking the following reliefs: - To grant judgment and decree a. dismissing the suit filed by the plaintiff in O.S.No.6713 of 2010 with exemplary cost. b. mandatory injunction directing the plaintiff to remove the generator installed at the present place of suit property and shift the same to place provided as per approved plan c. pass such other order in favour of the defendants as deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. c) Whereupon issues were framed. d) During trial, on the side of the plaintiffs, P.Ws.1 and were examined and Exs.A1 to A20 were marked. The second defendant examined himself as DW1 and marked Exs.B1 to B6. e) Ultimately the trial Court dismissed the suit of the plaintiff and allowed the counter claim as under: 1. that the suit be and the same is hereby dismissed. 2. that the plaintiff be and is hereby directed to remove the generator within 30 days and he can place it in any place provided as per the sketch. 3. that the plaintiff do pay defendant Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand only) towards the exemplary cost.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.