Amitava Lala, J. - (1.) THIS application is made on 11th of April, 2000. This is an interlocutory application arising out of the aforesaid commercial suit. In the instant application, the petitioner prayed for the following reliefs: a) The petitioner, its men, servants and agents be permitted to take possession and remove the equipment as mentioned in annexure 'P' hereof with the assistance of the Bidhannagar Police Station, 24 Parganas (North); b) Injunction restraining the respondent from interfering with ingress and egress from and out of the said premises by the men, servants and agents of the petitioner in any manner whatsoever; c) Injunction restraining the said respondent from causing any interference and/or hindrance and/or obstruction to the Technicians and Personnel of the petitioner from removing the equipment from the site in any manner whatsoever; d) Ad -interim order in terms of prayers (a) to (c) above; e) Costs of this application be borne by the respondent; f) Such further order or orders be passed and/or direction or directions be given as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper.
(2.) AT the interim stage, a Single Bench of this Court was pleased to direct to adjudicate the matter on affidavits on adjourned date and passed a limited order that the petitioner shall be entitled to attend the machinery and equipment for the purpose of maintenance upon notice to the defendant -respondent as and when the petitioner would consider it necessary. There was a prior suit instituted by the defendant -respondent on 23rd March, 2000 in the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division 3rd Court at Sealdah. 24 -Parganas (North) being T.S. 90 of 2000 claiming inter alia as follows: (a) A decree for declaration against the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 that they have made several wrongs in respect of the property at DD -30A, Salt Lake City, P.S. Bidhannagar, Calcutta -700064, in complete breach of contract dated 28 -03 -1995 making them liable jointly and severally. b) Permanent order of injunction restraining the defendants their men, agents and servants not to remove any goods from the premises no. DD -30A, Salt lake City. Calcutta -700064 (ill the disposal of the suit. c) Temporary Injunction, in terms of prayer (b); d) Inventory; e) Costs of the suit; f) Any other relief or reliefs.
(3.) IMMEDIATELY after filing of the suit, on 24th March, 2000, the respondent made an application under Sec. 144(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure in the Court of Learned Executive Magistrate at Bidhan Nagar, 24 -Parganas (North) in which a direction was obtained to maintain peace in between the parties in respect of premises in question. Subject to enquiry a report will be filed by the appropriate Police authority. On 24th April, 2000 a further interim order was passed directing the plaintiff -petitioner herein not to do any unlawful act in the premises. Both the parties were directed to maintain peace and tranquility in the premises. However, on 11th April, 2000 the plaintiff/petitioner instituted this suit in the High Court by making the plaintiff in the suit or the subordinate Court as party defendant upon obtaining leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent. The reliefs claimed in such suit are as follows: (a) Mandatory injunction as prayed for paragraph 17 above in order to enable the plaintiff to remove all its equipment and accessories described in Schedule 'I' now lying at Premises No. DD -3A, Sector -I, Salt Lake, Calcutta; b) Damages and/or enquiry into damages and a decree for such sums as may be found due upon such enquiry; c) Enquiry into damages as claimed in paragraph 22 above; d) Decree for a sum of Rs. 1.41 lacs as claimed in paragraph 14; e) Decree for a sum of Rs. 2.07 lacs as claimed in paragraph 15; f) Injunction; g) Receiver; h) Costs; i) Such further and other reliefs. ;