V-Guard Industries Ltd. vs Rakesh Malhotra

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

AMIT BANSAL
V-Guard Industries Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Rakesh Malhotra – Respondent

Table of Content
1. overview of plaintiffs' claims and past litigation history. (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. defendants argue for stay based on previous judgments. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
3. assessment of similarity and res judicata implications. (Para 10 , 24)
4. mandatory nature of section 10 cpc discussed. (Para 11 , 12 , 13)
5. final order to stay the suits. (Para 36 , 37)

JUDGMENT

Amit Bansal, J.

I.A. 8759/2019 (u/S 10 of the CPC for stay of suit) in CS(COMM) 1018/2016

I.A. 8760/2019 (u/S 10 of the CPC for stay of suit) in CS(COMM) 814/2018

1. By way of the present judgment, I shall dispose of I.A 8759/2019 and I.A. 8760/2019 filed on behalf of the defendants under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) seeking stay of the present suits, till the disposal of appeal, bearing no. RFA 117/2017 filed by the plaintiff herein before the Kerala High Court against the judgment and decree dated 22nd November, 2016 passed by the Additional District Judge, Ernakulam in OS no. 12/2013.

2. At the hearing on 4th July, 2019 the senior counsel for the plaintiff stated that no reply is required to be filed to the aforesaid applications.

3. CS(COMM) 1018/2016 has been filed on behalf of the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

AMIT BANSALV-Guard Industries Ltd. – AppellantVersusRakesh Malhotra – Respondent

AMIT BANSAL
V-Guard Industries Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Rakesh Malhotra – Respondent