IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISIDICTION

NOTICE OF MOTION NO 1656 OF 2014
IN
SUIT NO 1604 OF 2006
UNITED TELECOMS LIMITED AND ANR

PLAINTIFFS

VERSUS
MOTOROLA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

DEFENDANTS

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF THE NOTICE OF MOTION

I , Ajaykumar Radhakrishnan the authorized representative of the Plaintiffs

/Applicants adult Indian Inhabitant having my office address at No.
18A/19,Doddanekundi Industrial Area Mahadevpura Post Bnaglore 560048 do
hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as follows-

1. I say that I am the Authorized representative of the Plaintiff above named

and have been authorized to represent the Plaintiff/Applicant vide
resolution dated 3rd July 2014. I say that I am conversant with the facts of
the above case from the records of the Plaintiff/Applicants and I am filing
this Affidavit accordingly.

2. I say that the above suit has been filed against the Defendants inter alia for
a sum of Rs. 1,74,48,00,000/- (Rs One Hundred Seventy Four Crores and
Forty Eight Lacks Only) by way of damages and Rs. 14,93,630/- (Rs
Fourteen Lacks Ninety Three Thouand Six Hundred and Thirty Only) as
remuneration for engineering services rendered as per the particulars of the

claim annexed and marked as Exhibit R to the Plaint and for costs and other
reliefs as more particularly set out in the Plaint. I say that
Plaintiffs/Applicants had engaged and appointed Paras Kuhad and
Associates as their Advocates on Record for the captioned suit. I state that
the abovenamed Advocates failed to remain present when the suit was
listed on various dates. I state that on checking the High Court website to
my shock I found that the matter had been dismissed for default on 23 rd
June 2014.

3. I state that the matter was listed on 20th June 2014 for hearing and
thereafter again listed on 23rd June 2014 for dismissal after which the
Learned Judge passed the following Order.
On 20.6.2014 nobody appeared for the plaintiffs in the
morning session and also in the post lunch session when the matter
was kept back. Even today nobody is appearing for the plaintiffs
though the suit is listed under the caption for dismissal.
Hence, suit is dismissed.
Annexed hereto and marked as Exhibit A is the copy of the Order dated
23rd June 2014.

4. I thereafter rushed to Mumbai and asked the Advocate to take the necessary
steps to restore the same as the Company would have suffered great
financial hardship and loss due to their negligent act. I say that the present
Notice of Motion seeking reliefs for restoration was filed by the said
Advocates Paras Kuhad and Associates to restore the suit on 21 st July
2014. However the Advocates failed to move the proceedings and obtain

necessary orders from the Court. The Notice of Motion bearing No 1656
has continued to remain pending for a period of more than six months.

5. I state that inspite of repeated reminders as to what was the status of the
matter no action was taken by the said Advocates Paras Kuhad and
Associates. In view of the delay and no explanation forthcoming the
Plaintiffs were forced to seek a discharge and filed a Chamber Order No
186 of 2015

to seek discharge from the said Advocates. By Order dated

29th April 2015 passed by the Assistant Registrar, the said Advocates were
discharged. Annexed hereto and marked as Exhibit B

and Exhibit C

are copies of the letter of discharge and the Order of the Assistant Registrar
respectively.

6.

Immediately thereafter the Plaintiff appointed Advocate Mrs Rekha

Rajagopal and on the 6th May 2015 a fresh Vakalatnama was filed by the
present Advocate on record. I state that immediate steps were taken by the
Advocate and a pracepie and letter for circulation was filed on the 11 th June
2015.

7. I say that the Plaintiffs/Applicants have a very strong case in law and on
merits and ought to be given a reasonable and fair opportunity to get their
claim adjudicated as provided under the law as we are forced to suffer for
no fault of ours.
8.

I say that if the reliefs prayed for by the Plaintiffs/Applicants are not
granted grave and irrepairable loss, harm and prejudice will be caused to
the Plaintiff/applicants and on the other hand no harm loss or injury will be
caused to the Defendants by the grant of the reliefs prayed for.

9. I say that the Plaintiffs/Applicants have taken out a Notice of Motion and
prayed for reliefs as mentioned therein. I therefore pray that the Notice o
Motion be made absolute with costs.

Solemnly affirmed at Mumbai )

This

day of July 2014

Verified by me,

Before Me

Advocates for the Plaintiff/Applicant

IN THE HIGH COURT OF

JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL
CIVIL JURISIDICTION
SUIT NO 1604 OF 2006

United Telecoms Limited

Plaintiff
Vs
Motorola India Private Limited
...Defendant

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT
OF NOTICE OF MOTION
Dated

June , 2015

Advocate for the Plaintiff

Rekha Rajagopal
39A Mittal Chambers
Nariman Point Mumbai
400021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISIDICTION
Notice of Motion no 1656 OF 2014
IN
SUIT NO 1604 OF 2006
UNITED TELECOMS LIMITED AND ANR

PLAINTIFFS

VERSUS
MOTOROLA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

DEFENDANTS

INDEX
Sr.No.

Particulars

1.

Affidavit in Support Of Notice of Motion

2.

Exhibit A
Copy of order Dated 23rd June, 2014

3.

Exhibit B
Copy of order dated 29th April, 2015

4.

Exhibit C
Copy of discharge letter.

Page No.