22 AO-912-2023.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 912 OF 2023 Ami Tech India Private Limited & Another ...Appellants Versus Sridhar Munuswamy ...Respondent —————— Mr. Pankaj Vijayan i/b Intralegal for Respondent. Mr. Siddhesh Bhole, Mr. Ashwin Pimpale i/b SSB Legal and Advisory for Appellants. —————— CORAM : SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : 2nd July, 2026 P. C. : 1. The Appeal against the order dated 18th September, 2023 to the extent of direction to the Defendants to disclose the movable and immovable property. 2. After hearing learned counsel for parties for some time, learned counsel for the original Plaintiff, on instructions, submit that directions of disclosure may be quashed and set aside with liberty to the Plaintiff to file appropriate application afresh. 3. Learned counsel appearing for Defendant submits that as the Trial Court has rejected the application under Order XXXVIII, Rule 5 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 which has not been challenged and has Sairaj 1 of 3 22 AO-912-2023.doc attained finality, any fresh application would be hit by principles of res judicata. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the original Plaintiff has given his consent for quashing and setting aside the direction issued to the Defendants to disclose their movable and immovable property. In light of the consent given by learned counsel appearing for the original Plaintiff to quash and set aside the directions of disclosure, by which the learned counsel for the Appellant was aggrieved and present Appeal has been filed, in my view, the Appeal from Order can be disposed of by quashing the directions of disclosure of movable and immovable property contained in the impugned order of 18th September, 2023. 5. Learned counsel appearing for Defendants would further point out that though all other prayers were rejected except prayer clause (d) as regards the disclosure of movable and immovable assets, the impugned order records that Notice of Motion is partly allowed in terms of prayer clauses (b) and (d). 6. As it was the only direction of disclosure, granted by Trial Court, it is evident that only prayer clause (d) was granted. As the said direction is also quashed and set aside, the Notice of Motion stands dismissed in its entirety. 7. It is open for the Plaintiff to initiate fresh proceedings in event, Sairaj 2 of 3 22 AO-912-2023.doc the same is permissible in law. The Defendants are at liberty to raise all contentions as are available to them. 8. In view of above, nothing survives for consideration in pending applications, if any, and the same stand disposed of. [SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.] Sairaj 3 of 3