Skip to main content
Court Order

Final Order 1

CNR MHCC01000101201827 Apr 2018
City Civil Court, Mumbai
Mumbai · Maharashtra (MH)
Back to Case

Full Order Text

Final Order 1 · 27 Apr 2018 · CNR MHCC010001012018

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: 1
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 16 OF 2018
IN
SUMMARY SUIT NO. 3934 OF 2012
Computer Science Corporation India Pvt. Ltd. )...Plaintiff.
V/s.
Manisha Tulsiani . )...Defendant
And
DXC Technology India Private Limited )...Proposed plaintiff/
Applicant.
CORAM : His Honour Judge
SHRI. S.J.Biyani(C.R. NO.28)
DATE : 27/04/2018.
Ld advocate Mr. Ramakant Yadav for plaintiff.
Ld. advocate Mr. Ashish Gatagat for defendant.
ORAL ORDER
Perused chamber summons and reply. Heard both the
sides.
2. The plaintiff/applicant filed present chamber summons for
amending the name of plaintiff's Company as DXC Technology India
Private Limited instead of present name.
3. The plaintiff advocate submitted that in the year 2015,
plaintiff alongwith (a) Computer Sciences Corporation Business Process
-- 1 of 5 --
2
Services India Private Limited (b) iSOFT Health Management (India)
Private Limited and (c) iSOFT Health Services (India) Private Limited
(d) iSOFT R & D Private Limited and (e) Applabs Technologies Private
Limited have decided to amalgamate and merge with CSC
Technologies India Private Limited. CSC Technologies India Private
Limited change their name to DXC Technology India Private Limited.
The plaintiff have filed the copy of order dated 19/02/2016.
4. Otherside has objected and contended that deponent is not
having authority and no resolution filed.
5. Plaintiff have filed copy of certificate of incorporation
pursuant to change the name issued by Registrar of Companies and
copy of Company petition no. 536 to 542 of 2015 filed before Hon'ble
High Court of Madras.
6. After considering the proposed amendment, if allowed, it
would not change the nature of suit and no prejudice would be caused
to defendant as he is at liberty to file reply, if, think so, after
necessary amendment. So far as considering the objection about
authorization, it can be decided at due stage. Therefore, I find that for
deciding controversy, chamber summons needs to be allowed. In the
result, I pass following order:
ORDER
1. Chamber summons is made absolute .
2. The plaintiff to carry out necessary amendment in the
plaint as per schedule.
-- 2 of 5 --
3
3. Chamber summons is disposed of accordingly.
(S.J.Biyani )
Date:27/04/2018. City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr.Mumbai.
Dictated on : 27/04/2018
Transcribed on : 27/04/2018
Signed on : 27/04/2018
-- 3 of 5 --
4
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE: NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
2/05/2018 Mrs. V.V.Malgaonkar
TIME:12.03p.m.
Name of the Judge ( With Court
room no.) Shri S.J.Biyani
(Court Room No.28)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGEMENT/ORDER
27/04/2018
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
P.O. on
27/04/2018
JUDGEMENT/ORDER uploaded on 02/05/2018
-- 4 of 5 --
5
-- 5 of 5 --

TrustJury presents public court-record information for legal discovery and reference. Record availability and detail can vary by source and case.