SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1984 Supreme(Mad) 97

SATHIADEV, MOHAN
Mitsubishi France – Appellant
Versus
Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd. and Another – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:S. Govind Swaminathan, P. Jayaraman, U.N.R. Rao, T. Raghavan, Advocates.

Judgment :-

The appeal is against an order of our learned brother, Singaravelu J. dated 7-8-1983, made in C. S. No. 44 of 1977, in and by which the learned Judge declined the request of the appellant to try the issue relating to jurisdiction as a preliminary issue.

2. In order to appreciate the controversy between the parties it is necessary for us to note the following few facts :

O. S. No. 44 of 1977 is a suit filed by Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd. (first respondent herein) against defendants 1 and 2. The second defendant, Mitsubishi France (SA) is having its head office at Paris, while the first defendant has its branch at Madras. The suit was laid for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 33,21,784.27 being the damages for breach of contract, with future interest. When the second defendant was served with the suit summons, it entered appearance on 13-10-1977 under protest and contested the jurisdiction of the Court stating that the plaintiff had no jurisdiction to institute the suit, because the second defendant is situated outside the territorial limits of India. The matter came up for decision before our learned brother, Shanmukham J. He, by his order posted the issue relating to the


























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top