Madras High Court
M.I.Enterprises vs Southern Health Foods Private ... on 24 August, 2021
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.08.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
C.S.(Comm Div.)No.33 of 2021
M.I.Enterprises,
A Partnership Firm,
Rep. herein by its Managing Partner,
Mr.N.Shajahan,
AP-52, L-Block,
5th Street, 12th Main Road,
Anna Nagar, Chennai 600 035. .. Plaintiff
vs
Southern Health Foods Private Limited,
Rep. herein by its Managing Director,
Mr.Arjun Saigal,
No.477-482, Anna Salai,
Khivraj Complex, 3rd Floor,
Nandanam,
Chennai 600 035. ...Defendant
Prayer:Civil Suit filed under Order IV Rule I of the O.S.Rules 1956 read
with Order VII Rule 1 of CPC, 1908 read with Section 7 of the
Commercial Courts, Commercial Appellate Courts, Commercial Division
and the Commercial Appellate Divisions of the High Courts Act 2015
(Act 4 of 2016) praying for the following:
a. directing the defendant to pay to the plaintiff a sum of
Rs.1,95,76,967/- (One Crore Ninety Five Lakhs Seventy Six Thousand
Nine Hundred and Sixty Seven only) being the outstanding dues payable
by the defendant inclusive of interest computed at the rate of 18% per
annum and further interest at the rate of 18% per annum thereon from the
date of plaint till the date of realization.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
2
b) to direct the defendant to pay the costs of the suit.
For Plaintiffs : Mr.N.Ramakrishnan
For Defendants : Mr.K.Ganesan
JUDGMENT
The suit is filed for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,95,76,967/- with
interest at the rate of 18% per annum.
2.According to the plaint, the cause of action for the suit arose,
when the plaintiff was appointed as a Super Stockist by the defendant
and in the course of the business, without settling the dues, the defendant
has unilaterally terminated the Super Stockist Agreement entered with
the plaintiff.
3.After completion of the pleadings before framing issues, the
parties have negotiated among themselves and had settled the dispute
amicably out of Court. As per the terms of the settlement, the defendant
had paid a sum of Rs.15 lakhs to the plaintiff towards full quit and
settlement. A memorandum of compromise has been entered between
the parties on 09.08.2021.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
4. The plaintiff and his counsel present through video
conferencing. Learned counsel for the defendant is present before the
Court physically. The parties have agreed to record the memorandum of
compromise and pass a compromise decree in terms of the memorandum
of compromise. A letter from the plaintiff dated 09.08.2021 addressed to
the defendant, intimating that there is no due from the defendant is
annexed along with the memorandum of compromise. The terms of
compromise are found in paragraph 6 (a) to (e) of the said letter. In view
of the compromise memo, the suit is decreed in terms of the compromise
entered between the parties, which is extracted in paragraph 6(a) to (e).
The same shall form part of the decree. The plaintiff shall be entitled for
refund of court fee in accordance with law.
24.08.2021
vri
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.
Vri
C.S.No.33 of 2021
24.08.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
