R. BANUMATHI, J

1. These appeals arise out of common order dated 18.2.2010, whereby the learned single Judge allowed the application - O.A.No.372 of 2005 filed by the 1st respondent under Order XIV Rule 8 of Original Side Rules read with Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. rejecting the plaint insofar as the 2nd defendant is concerned. Consequentially the learned single Judge dismissed the applications against defendant No.2 and vacated the interim injunction granted in so far as the 2nd defendant.

2. The facts are not in dispute. The appellant/plaintiff is a limited Company having its registered office at Delhi and supplying cables to the Electricity Boards. The 1st respondent - National Small Industries Corporation (in short, "NSIC") is a Government Company incorporated under the Companies Act having its registered Office at NSIC Bhawan, near Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi. The 2nd respondent - Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (in short, "TNEB") placed three purchase orders on the appellant/plaintiff Company - (i) P.O.No.49, dated 10.6.1999, (ii) P.O.No.125 dated 30.10.1999 and (iii) P.O.No.186 dated 27.3.2000. The subject matter in dispute in C.S.No.309 of 2005 is in respect of purchase order No.125/99-2000 on 30.10.1999 for supply of -120 Kms of 3.5 x 240 Sq.mm. Cables. For supply of cables of various measurements to TNEB, the plaintiff/appellant availed financial assistance under the Bill Discounting System of the 1st respondent - NSIC. The appellant supplied 59.127 Kms of cables from time to time. The case of Appellant/Plaintiff is that plaintiff could not effect the supply of balance quantity due to several acts of commission and omission on the part of TNEB. According to appellant, first defendant - TNEB owes a sum of Rs.86,15,524.34, for which it has failed and neglected to pay inspite of several demands.

3. Further case of appellant is that without taking any action on the bills discounted by it, the 2nd defendant initiated action against the Plaintiff under Uttar Pradesh Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1972 and the amount claimed by the 2nd Defendant was sought to be recovered as arrears of land revenue. Earlier, the appellant had filed Writ Petition in W.P.No.43495 of 2004 on the file of Allahabad High Court, but the writ petition was dismissed, which came to be challenged before the Supreme Court by way of Special Leave Petition in S.L.P.No.4003 of 2005 and the said S.L.P. was dismissed with certain observations giving liberty to the plaintiff to implead T.N.E.B. Alleging that the cause of action has arisen at Chennai against both the T.N.E.B., as well as the 1st respondent, the appellant has filed the suit for (i) recovery of a sum of Rs.86,15,524.34ps with interest at the rate of 15.75% per annum with monthly rests and (ii) for permanent injunction restraining the 2nd defendant from initiating action against the plaintiff or its Director under Section 3 of U.P.Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1972 in respect of the amount due by the 1st defendant.

4. The 2nd respondent - TNEB is resisting the suit contending that the appellant received the payment for all the quantity of cable supplied ie., 55,855 Kms of cables under the purchase order P.O.125/99-2000 either directly from TNEB or through the 2nd defendant under Discounting facility. TNEB has further averred that out of 19.346 Km cables discounted by the 1st respondent, TNEB reimbursed to NSIC for 4.555 km cables and for the balance 14.791 Kms of cables, 1st defendant - TNEB will have to give payment to NSIC - 2nd defendant. However, it is further averred that without referring to other purchase orders plaintiff has earlier filed C.S.No.452 of 2004 in respect of P.O.NO.49 dated 10.6.1999. This suit - C.S.No.309 of 2005 has been filed in respect of purchase order - P.O.No.125 dated 30.10.1999. The TNEB has averred that as per records available with TNEB, the total amount from the TNEB to the plaintiff in all the three purchase orders work out to rs.10,97,67