SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(SC) 1769

R.V.RAVEENDRAN, D.K.JAIN
Yogi Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
Inspiration Clothes – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant :Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Sunil Singhania and Sarad Kumar Singh, Advocates.

ORDER

R.V. Raveendran J. —

Dismissal of an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘the Act’ for short), filed by the defendants in a money suit (filed by the first respondent herein against three defendants, that is, third respondent company, and its two directors namely, petitioner and second respondent), affirmed by the High Court, has led to the filing of this special leave petition. For convenience, we will refer to the parties by their rank in the suit.

2.There is a delay of 182 days in filing this petition. The only reason assigned by the petitioner, a seasoned businessman, to explain the delay is that he was confused by diverse opinions about filing of special leave petition. The explanation is neither satisfactory nor sufficient to condone the delay. Even assuming that the delay is condonable, we find that the special leave petition is liable to be rejected on merits.

3.The plaintiff filed the suit on 9.9.2003 for recovery of Rs.9,48,143 with interest allegedly due in regard to (i) price of two consignments supplied by plaintiff to the nominees of the first defendant company and (ii) value of nine samples made available by the plaintiff to de







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top