eCourtsIndia

Electronfab Engineering Pvt.Ltd. vs. Runwal Constructions

Interim Order
Court:Bombay High Court, Mumbai, Maharashtra
Judge:Hon'ble Milind N. Jadhav
Case Status:Pending
Order Date:28 Jun 2023
CNR:HCBM020272112014

AI Summary

Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order

Order Issued After Hearing

Purpose:

For Framing Issues

Before:

Hon'ble Hon'Ble Shri Justice B.P. Colabawalla

Listed On:

12 Jun 2023

Order Text

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J.

SUIT NO. 962 OF 2014

M/s. Electronfab Engineering Pvt. Ltd.<br>Plaintiff
Versus
Runwal Constructions and Anr.<br>Defendants

....................

  • Mr. Ankit Lohia a/w. Zeeshan Farooqui and Meiron Damania i/by Gagrats, Advocates for Plaintiff.
  • Ms. Gunjan Shah a/w. Mr. Sahil Harjani i/by Desai and Diwanji, Advocates for Defendants.

...................

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : JUNE 28, 2023.

P.C.:

1. Heard Mr. Lohia, learned Advocate for Plaintiff and Ms. Shah, learned Advocate for Defendants.

2. This is a Suit for specific partition.

3. Mr. Lohia has tendered draft issues on behalf of Plaintiff. I have perused the pleadings with the able assistance of the learned Advocates for the Plaintiff and Defendants.

4. After perusing the pleadings, following issues are framed by the Court:-

i. Whether the Plaintiff proves that it is entitled to a declaration that the 24 Allotment Agreements all dated 23rd November 2005 for allotment of the suit 24 flats

are valid and subsisting between the Plaintiff and Defendants and the Defendants are bound and liable to perform the same?

  • ii. Whether the Plaintiff proves that the Plaintiff has always been and is still ready and willing to carry out all its obligations under the said 24 Allotment Agreements?
  • iii. Whether the Plaintiff proves that it is entitled to a declaration that termination of the 24 allotment agreements by Defendant No.1 vide 12 separate termination letters all dated 2nd December 2012 is wrong, illegal, invalid, void and not binding on the Plaintiff?
  • iv. Whether Plaintiff is entitled to an order and decree against Defendant No. 1 of specific performance of the 12 Allotment Agreements all dated 23rd November 2005?
  • v. In the alternative to specific performance Whether the Plaintiff proves that it is entitled to an order and decree for damages against Defendants for a sum of Rs.22,70,13,300/- (as set out in Exhibit OO to the Plaint) with interest at the rate of 18% per annum

compounded quarterly thereon from the date of filing of the Suit until payment and/or realization thereof and refund of a sum of Rs.1,61,06,700/- with interest at the rate of 18% per annum compounded quarterly thereon from the date of filing of the Suit until payment and/or realization thereof?

  • vi. Whether the Defendants prove that the Defendants had validly terminated the the 24 letters of allotment vide their 12 letters of termination, all dated 2nd December, 2013 since the Plaintiff had not decided on whether it wanted the original 24 flats re-configured into 12 flats?
  • vii. Whether the Defendants prove that the reasons for the delay of the project constitute a case of force majeure?
  • viii. Whether the Defendants prove that the Plaintiff is liable to pay escalation in price, as demanded by the Defendants?
  • ix. What order?
  • x. What costs?

5. Mr. Lohia would next submit that the Plaintiff would like to lead evidence of its witness on the next adjourned date.

11.s.962.14.doc

6. Plaintiff is directed to file the list of its witnesses alongwith Affidavit-in-lieu of evidence of its witness/s and compilation of documents. Compilation of documents is directed to be served on the Advocate for Defendants within a period of four weeks from today alongwith proper indexation. On receipt of the said compilation of documents, Advocate for Defendants are directed to intimate the admission and denial of documents to the Advocate for Plaintiff within a period of two weeks thereafter.

7. It is directed that Advocates for the parties shall exchange amongst themselves and complete the admission and denial of documents. This exercise be carried out and informed to the Court accordingly on the next adjourned date, on which date this Court shall mark the documents as Exhibits, considering the objections, if any, and accordingly proceed with passing further directions for recording evidence in the Suit.

  • 8. Liberty to apply.
  • 9. Stand over to 23rd August, 2023.

[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

Ajay

Original Order Copy

Get a certified copy of this order

Share This Order

Case History of Orders

Order(7) - 28 Jul 2023

Interim Order

Click to view

Order(6) - 28 Jun 2023

Interim Order

Viewing

Order(5) - 12 Jun 2023

Interim Order

Click to view

Order(4) - 25 Oct 2018

Interim Order

Click to view

Order(3) - 23 Sept 2015

Interim Order

Click to view

Order(2) - 30 Jun 2015

Interim Order

Click to view

Order(1) - 3 Mar 2015

Interim Order

Click to view