November 14, 2021 court of first instance - Orders
Claim No. CFI 025/2020
THE DUBAI INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE COURTS
IN THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
BETWEEN
UNION BANK OF INDIA (DIFC BRANCH)
Claimant
and
(1) VELOCITY INDUSTRIES LLC
(2) VELOCITY VENTURE LTD.
(3) UMAKU TRADE INVEST LIMITED
(4) VJEY KAPOOR
(5) RAVI KUCHIMANKI
(6) RAJINDER MAKHIJANI
(7) PARAG GUPTA
(8) DEVIKA SWATI
Defendants
DISCLOSURE ORDER OF JUSTICE LORD ANGUS GLENNIE
UPON the Amended Agreed Case Management Order dated 31 August 2021
AND UPON considering the Sixth (“D6”), Seventh (“D7”) and Eighth Defendants' (“D8”) request for document disclosure by the Claimant dated 24 October 2021 (“D6-D8 Request to the Claimant”)
AND UPON considering the Sixth, Seventh and Eighth Defendants' request for document disclosure by the Fourth Defendant (“D4”) dated 24 October 2021 (“D6 - D8 Request to D4”)
AND UPON considering the Sixth, Seventh and Eighth Defendants' request for document disclosure by the Fifth Defendant (“D5”) dated 24 October 2021(“D6 - D8 Request to D5”)
AND UPON considering the Fourth Defendant’s request for document disclosure by the Second Defendant (“D2”) and Fifth Defendant dated 24 October 2021 (“D4’s Request to D2 and D5”)
AND UPON considering the Fourth Defendant’s request for document disclosure by the Sixth, Seventh and Eighth Defendants dated 24 October 2021 (“D4’s Request to D6 - D8”)
AND UPON considering the objection to the request for document disclosure filed by the Sixth, Seventh and Eighth Defendants on 31 October 2021
AND UPON considering the objection to the request for document disclosure filed by the Second Defendant and Fifth Defendant on 31 October 2021
AND UPON considering the objection to the request for document disclosure filed by the Claimant on 31 October 2021
AND UPON considering the objection to the request for document disclosure filed by the Fourth Defendant on 31 October 2021
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. D4’s Request to D2 and D5 is granted.
2. D4’s Request to D6 - D8 is refused.
3. D6 - D8’s Request to the Claimant is refused.
4. D6 - D8’s Request to D4 is refused.
5. D6 - D8’s Request to D5 is partially granted wherein requests 1 and 2 are refused but requests 3 and 4 are granted.
Issued by:
Nour Hineidi
Registrar
Date of issue: 14 November 2021
At: 3.30pm
SCHEDULE OF REASONS
D4's Request to D2 and D5
1. Requests 1-3 are granted
2. Relevance is not disputed. The documents sought relate to court proceedings allegedly brought or instituted by D2 and D5. It may be that the documents are publicly available, but it is sensible to avoid further argument and to avoid possible misunderstandings as to what proceedings are referred to that the documents should be produced by D2 and D5.
D4's Request to D6-8
3. Request is refused.
4. I am not persuaded by the technical arguments advanced on behalf of D6-8. However, they say that no documents exist within the categories sought, and that they have carried out a search. Nothing has been put forward to suggest that this is wrong. There is no point, therefore, in ordering production of these documents if they do not exist. It is always open to D4 to renew his request if matters come to light casting doubt on the Answer given by D6-8 or, of course, reliance may be placed on the absence of any such documents.
D6 - 8's Request to the Claimant
5. Request is refused.
6. Documents have been provided with the Response to these requests. If it turns out that what has been given is inadequate, a new application can be made.
D6 - 8's Request to D4
7. Request is refused.
8. There is no reason on the material before me to doubt the explanation that D4 does not have documents falling within the scope of the Requests and that any relevant documents may be in the possession of companies which are no longer in existence. A new application can be made if circumstances change.
D6 - 8's Request to D5
9. Requests 1 and 2 are refused.
10. Documents not in possession of D5. A new application can be made if circumstances change.
11. Requests 3 and 4 are granted.
12. D5 says that "Documents unavailable with the legal representatives of D2 and D5". I take this to mean that the documents are presently held by their lawyers. On that basis the documents are in their possession because they can ask their lawyers to hand them over to them.
