Case Note & Summary
The appeal arises from an order dated 25 November 2013 passed by the City Civil Court, Greater Mumbai, refusing to grant ad-interim relief in an anti-suit injunction suit filed by the appellants (original plaintiffs) against the respondent, Punjab National Bank. The appellants sought to restrain the respondent from continuing proceedings in the High Court of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of First Instance, being Action No.1888 of 2013, for recovery of US $11,448,985.28. The appellants had already acknowledged the writ of summons and were required to file a defence within 28 days, with the last date being 26 December 2013. They contended that if a decree is passed in Hong Kong, it would be executable in India under Sections 13, 14, and 44A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, as Hong Kong is a reciprocating territory. The trial court had refused ad-interim relief. In the High Court, the respondent appeared but sought time to file a reply, and no affidavit opposing the injunction was filed. The court, after hearing rival submissions and considering the Supreme Court judgment in Modi Entertainment Network v. W.S.G. Cricket Pte. Ltd., adjourned the matter to 23 December 2013 for filing of reply, leaving the question of ad-interim relief open. The court did not pass any ad-interim order at this stage.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Anti-Suit Injunction - Principles for Grant - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Sections 13, 14, 44A - The court considered whether to grant an ad-interim anti-suit injunction restraining the respondent bank from proceeding with a recovery suit in Hong Kong. The appellants argued that the foreign decree would be executable in India as Hong Kong is a reciprocating territory. The court, after hearing submissions and noting that no reply was filed by the respondent, adjourned the matter to 23 December 2013 for filing of reply, leaving the question of ad-interim relief open. (Paras 2-5) B) Civil Procedure - Foreign Decree - Executability in India - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Sections 13, 14, 44A - The court noted that if the appellants fail to file a defence in the Hong Kong proceedings by 26 December 2013, a foreign decree may follow, which would be executable in India as Hong Kong is a reciprocating country under Section 44A CPC. (Para 3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether an Indian court can grant an ad-interim anti-suit injunction restraining a party from continuing proceedings in a foreign court (Hong Kong) when the foreign decree would be executable in India under Sections 13, 14, and 44A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Final Decision
The court adjourned the matter to 23 December 2013 for filing of reply by the respondent, to be placed high on board. No ad-interim relief was granted at this stage.
Law Points
- Anti-suit injunction
- principles of comity
- balance of convenience
- irreparable injury
- prima facie case
- foreign decree execution
- reciprocating territory
