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

2016 Supreme(Mad) 1675

K.K.SASIDHARAN
BMIC Limited – Appellant
Versus
Chinnakannan Sivasankaran – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : H. Karthik Seshadri

ORDER :

K.K. Sasidharan, J.

1. Whether interlocutory application for injunction is maintainable even before the admission of execution petition filed to execute a foreign judgment and decree is the core issue that arises for consideration in the application in A. No. 1245 of 2016 filed under Order XIV Rule 12 of Original Side Rules.

The facts in outline:--

The applicant obtained a money decree against the Respondents 1 and 2 from the High Court of Justice, "Queen's Bench Division, Commercial Court on 12 June 2012 in Claim No. 12. (Folio No.1439). Since the decree was not satisfied, the English Court passed a 'Worldwide Freezing Order' against the assets of respondents 1 and 2 (hereinafter referred to as Judgment Debtors) on 10 July 2014.

2. The applicant filed proceedings before the Supreme Court of Seychelles to register the judgment passed by the English Court. The first applicant in the mean time initiated proceedings to declare him as insolvent. He was adjudged insolvent by the Supreme Court of Seychelles on 21 July 2014. The Official Receiver was appointed as the Receiver and Manager of the Estate of first respondent. Thereafter, by order dated 18 January 2016, the Supreme Court of










































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