1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 1040 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO. 958 OF 2008 Central Warehousing Corporation ....Plaintiff Versus M/s. Suntech Peripherals Pvt. Ltd. ....Defendant Ms. S. I. Shah, Advocate for the Plaintiff. Ms. Deepa Kamath i/b. Ms.Annie Fernandes, Advocate for the Defendant. CORAM : R. V. MORE, J. DATE : 10th MARCH, 2010. P.C. : Heard learned Counsel for the Plaintiff and Defendant. 2. The chamber summons is taken out by the Defendant for revocation of leave granted on 3rd March, 2008 under Clause 12 of Letters Patent. It is submitted on behalf of the Defendant that the Plaintiff lodged the suit on 28th February, 2008 and leave under Clause 12 of Letter Patent was obtained on 3rd March, 2008. It was further submitted that the Plaintiff ought to have obtained leave prior to the institution of the suit and since the same was obtained subsequent to the date of filing of the suit, it deserves to be revoked. 2 3. The learned Counsel for the Plaintiff, on the contrary, submitted that though the suit was lodged on 28th February, 2008 alongwith petition for leave under Clause 12 of Letters Patent, the leave under Clause 12 was granted by the Court on 3rd March, 2008 and the plaint was admitted thereafter on 25th March, 2008. Thus, the leave was obtained prior to the date on which the suit is admitted under Rule 47 of the Original Side Rules. 4. Having heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties, I do not find any merit in the chamber summons. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Quadricon Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Shri Bajrang Alloys Ltd. Reported in 2009 (5) Bom.C.R.345 in paragraph 31 observed as follows: “ The suit which requires leave under Clause 12 must be presented as provided under Rule 45 of the Original Side Rules and any objection including the objection in respect of non compliance of leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent shall be complied with before the suit is admitted under Rule 47 of the Original Side Rules. The objection in respect of the non compliance of the leave under Clause 12 can be raised at any stage of the proceedings and section 21 of the C.P.C will not be attracted in respect of such objections to the jurisdiction. Order IV, Rule 1 and more specifically sub-rule (3) has no application when the suit 3 has been instituted without obtaining leave of the Court and thereby claiming a post facto leave, since the Court, while granting leave under Clause 12, is doing a judicial function since the Court was not called upon to carry on the said judicial function by filing an appropriate application to grant leave under Clause 12 sub-rule (3) of Rule 1, Order IV of C.P.C. is not attracted”. The plaint was admitted under Rule 47 of the Original Side Rules on 25th March, 2008. Leave under Clause 12 of Letters Patent was granted on 3rd March, 2008 i.e. prior to admission of the plaint under Rule 47 of the Original Side Rules. In the above facts, I find no irregularity. The chamber summons is devoid of any merit and same is accordingly, dismissed. Sd/- (R. V. MORE, J.)