In Brief
The plaintiff sought relief against orders requiring deposit of ₹42,00,000 as security, passed after a trial court granted temporary injunction. The High Court set aside the injunction, and the Supreme Court dismissed the plaintiff's SLP on that issue. However, the security deposit order remained. The Court held that since the underlying injunction application had been dismissed, the dependent security deposit order could not stand. Accordingly, both the trial court's order of 17.09.2016 and the High Court's interim order of 07.06.2017 were set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.