1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

(ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION)

FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. SUBRAMANIAN

C.S.No. 703 of 2004

Alumayer India Pvt.Ltd.,

Pace Business Centre,

61, Marol Co-operative Industrial Estate,

Sir M.V.Road,

Andheri (E), Mumbai – 59

Represented by its General Manager

Vivek Keskar

... Plaintiff

Vs.

1.Larsen & Toubro Limited

L&T House,

Ballard Estate,

P.O.Box 278, Mumbai – 400 001.

2.State Bank of India,

Overseas Branch,

Vijaya Building,

17, Barakhamba Road,

New Delhi – 110 001.

3.Bank Hapoalim

34, Rolehild Street

Rishon - Le - Zion

Israel.

... Defendants

Civil suit praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pray for a

judgment and decree:

a. Directing the 1^st defendant to pay a sum of Rs.2,45,40,219.08

together with 15% interest p.a. on Rs.2,45,40,219.08 from the date of the

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2

plaint till the date of realization;

b. Grant permanent injunction restraining the 2^nd defendant, its

Directors, persons claiming through or under them from making any

payment to the 1^st defendant on the basis of the Bank Guarantee

No.0480303CG003022 dated 04.04.2003;

c. Grant permanent injunction restraining the 3^rd defendant from

making any payment to the 2^nd defendant on the basis of the Bank Guarantee

No.634-02-000031-5 dated 13.03.2003

d. Directing the defendants to pay the costs of the suit to the plaintiff.

This Civil suit having been heard on 23.08.2021 in the presence of

Mr.T.K. Bhaskar, Advocate for the plaintiff herein and Mr.R.Murari, Senior

Counsel for M/s.K.P.Indira, Advocates for the 1st defendant herein and

upon reading the plaint filed herein and the order dated 18/07/2008 and the

other exhibits therein referred to and upon perusing the evidence adduced

therein and having stood over for consideration till this date and coming on

this day before this court for orders in the presence of said advocates for the

parties hereto and the learned counsel for the plaintiff having submitted that

since the plaint is not returned under order VII Rule 10 or 10A of the Code

of Civil Procedure and direct the Court to which the plaint is to be re-

presented to proceed with the suit from the stage at which the plaint is

returned and not opt for a de novo trial once this Court have held that this

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3

Court has no jurisdiction to try the suit and this Court does not think that it

will be proper to suggest as to how the case should be proceeded with in the

Court having jurisdiction therefore this Court choose to leave the question

open to be decided by the Court to which the plaint is re-presented and it is

ordered as follows:-

That this Court direct to return the plaint to the counsel for the

plaintiff to be re-presented to proper Court within a period of three (3)

months from the date of return.

2. That the parties hereto, shall bear their own costs in this Court.

WITNESS THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE,

CHIEF JUSTICE, HIGH COURT AT MADRAS AFORESAID, THIS THE

3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021.

Sd/-

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (Comm. Cases)

//Certified to be true copy//

Dated at Madras this the day of 2021.

COURT OFFICER(O.S.)

From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies

of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4

EVK

03/09/2021

C.S.No. 703 of 2004

ORDER

DATED : 03.09.2021

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE

R. SUBRAMANIAN

FOR APPROVAL: 08/10/2021

APPROVED ON: 12/10/2021

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Judgment Reserved on

23.08.2021

Judgment Delivered on

03.09.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

C.S.No.703 of 2004

Alumayer India Pvt.Ltd.,

Pace Business Centre,

61, Marol Co-operative Industrial Estate,

Sir M.V.Road,

Andheri