M/S.UNIQUE INTEGRATED TRANSPORT and MANAGEMENT CONSULANCIES PVT.LTD. vs MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAMLTD.and ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

3-APP.39.13-2.DOCX PPN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Digitally signed by PRACHI APPEAL NO. 39 OF 2013 PRACHI PRANESH PRANESH NANDIWADEKAR NANDIWADEKAR IN Date: 2025.07.08 10:46:10 +0530 SUIT NO.1165 OF 1996 M/s. Unique Integrated Transport & … Appellant Management Consultancies Pvt. Ltd. Versus Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. & … Respondents Ors. ______________________________________________________ Dr. K.K. Khanna for the Appellant. Mr. Niranjan Shimpi for the Respondents. _____________________________________________________ CORAM : M.S. Sonak & Jitendra Jain, JJ. DATED : 4 July 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (M.S. Sonak, J.) :- 1. Heard Dr. K. K. Khanna, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Niranjan Shimpi, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The Appellant is the original Plaintiff, and the Respondent is the original Defendant in Suit No. 1165 of 1996. 3. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 26 September 2012 made by the learned Single Judge of this Court dismissing Suit No.1165 of 1996 with a cost of Rs. 1 lakh payable to the High Court Legal Services Authority. Page 1 of 11 3-APP.39.13-2.DOCX 4. Dr. Khanna submitted that the suit has primarily been dismissed by invoking the bar of res judicata. He points out that such a plea was never raised by the respondents (defendants) in their written statement, and consequently, no issue relating to the bar of res judicata was ever raised. He submitted that it was only in the impugned judgment that the suit was dismissed primarily by invoking the bar of res judicata. He submits that on this short ground, the impugned judgment and decree warrant interference. 5. Mr. Shimpi, learned counsel for the respondents, submits that the claim in the suit was raised b