Court grants interim relief to Plaintiff, including injunctions and asset disclosure.

The court granted ad interim relief in favor of the Plaintiff, including injunctions against disposing of properties, disclosure of assets by defendants, and a direction for Defendant No. 20 to deposit a specified amount in court. The court emphasized the importance of protecting the Plaintiff's rights and preventing prejudice. The issue of maintainability due to the arbitration agreement was deferred for future consideration based on relevant applications.

---

---

Issues: Recovery of dues from multiple defendants, ad interim relief sought by the plaintiff, maintainability of the suit due to arbitration agreement.

Recovery of Dues:
The Plaintiff sought to recover a substantial amount of money from Defendant Nos. 1 to 16 and Defendant No. 20. The claim arose from transactions conducted on the Plaintiff's trading platform by Defendant No. 1 on behalf of itself and its related entities. Defendant No. 1 admitted liability of Rs. 693 crores, while Defendant No. 20 admitted to owing Rs. 29.20 crores to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff presented evidence, including ledger accounts and bank statements, to support the claim. The court found that Defendant No. 1 had defaulted on its obligations, leading to the Plaintiff declaring it a defaulter.

Ad Interim Relief:
The Plaintiff sought ad interim relief to protect its claim, including directing Defendant No. 20 to deposit Rs. 29.20 crores in court. The court, after reviewing the material presented, granted ad interim relief in favor of the Plaintiff. The relief included injunctions against disposing of properties by certain defendants and disclosure of assets by Defendant Nos. 1 to 16 and 20. The court emphasized the necessity of granting protective relief to prevent prejudice to the Plaintiff's rights.

Maintainability of the Suit:
The Defendants raised the issue of the suit's maintainability due to an arbitration agreement between the Plaintiff and Defendant No. 1. The Plaintiff argued that other defendants, who were necessary parties to the suit, were not part of the arbitration agreement. Citing legal precedent, the Plaintiff contended that the suit should not be referred to arbitration. The court decided not to address this issue at the ad interim stage, leaving it open for consideration when relevant applications are made under the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996.

Conclusion:
The court granted ad interim relief in favor of the Plaintiff, acknowledging the strong case made by the Plaintiff for such relief. The order included injunctions against disposing of properties, disclosure of assets by defendants, and a direction for Defendant No. 20 to deposit a specified amount in court. The court emphasized the importance of protecting the Plaintiff's rights and preventing prejudice. The issue of maintainability due to the arbitration agreement was deferred for future consideration based on relevant applications.

---