1 ao1446-10 dmt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1446 OF 2010. WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1792 OF 2010 SERGI Transformer Explosion Prevention Technologies Pvt. Ltd., .. Appellant Vs. CTR Manufacturing Industries Ltd., .. Respondent Mr. Atul Rajadhyaksha i/by Sanjay Kher & Chaitanya Chavan & Rani Boazz for the Appellant. Mr. Vishal Knade with Amit Jajoo, Rahul Lamba & A. Chaturvedi i/by M/s. Paras Kuhad & Asso. for Respondent. CORAM: U. D. SALVI, JJ. (VACATION JUDGE) DECEMBER 24, 2010. P.C. Heard. 2. Perused the appeal and the annexures therewith. The controversy arises out of the patents in respect of “system and method for preventing and/or detecting explosion and/or fire of electrical transformers”. According to the appellant-defendant they have been 2 ao1446-10 precluded from presenting drawings of their product to M/s. Delhi Transco Limited pursuant to the acceptance of their bid after competing with the respondent-plaintiff in the tender process as a result of the ex-parte order dated 9-12.2010 passed by the D.J.-I, Thane below Exhibit-73, an application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 moved by the respondent- plaintiff. 3. The order dated 9.12.2010 reads as under :- “1] Issue notice to the Defendant No. 1 returnable on 15/12/2010. Within time, the defendant No. 1 shall prevent himself from taking any steps towards compliance of the purchase order dtd. 02/12/2010 issued by the DTL. 2] The plaintiff shall comply the mandatory provisions under Rule 3 of Order of C.P.C. And shall file affidavit about the compliance.” 4. According to Mr. Rajadhyaksha, the learned counsel for the 3 ao1446-10 Appellant, the order passed below application Exhibit-73, which has been impugned in the present appeal was served on the Defendant No.1, the appellant herein on 14.12.2010 at New Delhi and the appellant appeared before the D.J. - I, Thane on 15.12.2010 and sought time to file say. As a result, the proceedings were adjourned to 11.2011 and the order below Exhibit-73 was continued. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, they have raised material questions of law and facts vide their written statement filed in the said suit and yet the circumstances as procured by the impugned order had prevented them from submitting their drawings before M/s. Delhi Transco Limited and there is imminent danger of they being blacklisted as a result of delay caused in submitting the said drawings with the passage of every day. 5. On the other hand, it is pointed out by the contesting respondent-plaintiff that there is no urgency in the present matter as the datum line for presenting the drawings is over and the appellant could have moved the trial Court for relaxation of the impugned order so as to enable them to take steps as conceived presently. 6. The controversy needs to be gone into by the D.J. - I, Thane 4 ao1446-10 by deciding the merits of the rival contentions. It would, therefore, be just and fair that the D.J. - I, Thane or the Court In-charge during Vacation hears the plea of the appellant for the limited relief seeking liberty to submit the drawings to M/s. Delhi Transco Limited as per the purchase order dated 2.12.2010. Hence, the order. ORDER 1] The parties shall appear before the District Judge, Thane on Monday, the 27th December, 2010 at about 11.00 a.m. 2] The appellant shall move an application for permission to submit the drawings to M/s. Delhi Transco Limited as per the purchase order dated 2.12.2010 and the District Judge, Thane or D.J. - I, Thane shall hear the parties and pass appropriate order in accordance with law on the same day. 7. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. 8. All contentions of the parties are kept open. The learned 5 ao1446-10 Advocate for the appellant undertakes to serve a copy of the application to be moved before the D.J. - I, Thane to the plaintiff on or ebfore 25.12.2010 and the contesting plaintiffs shall hand over their reply to such application a day before i.e., 26.12.2010 to them. 9. The civil application does not survive. The same stands dismissed accordingly. (U.D. SALVI, J.) (U.D. SALVI, J.)