Back
SHEKHAR B. SARAF
Aaryan Projects Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Klowin Infrastructure Private Limited. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Shekhar B. Saraf, J. - The petitioner (the defendant in C.S. No. 205 of 2017) Klowin Infrastructure Private Limited had filed this application bearing G.A. No. 3 of 2021, praying for recalling or setting aside of the ex-parte decree dated June 12, 2019 passed by this Court. The application has been filed under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'CPC'). The petitioner also prays for an order of injunction restraining the plaintiff to proceed in E.C. No. 393 of 2019 which has been filed pursuant to the ex-parte decree passed by this Court on June 12, 2019.
2. The facts of the matter are as follows:-
a) The plaintiff company and the defendant company entered into an agreement dated August 28, 2013 wherein both the parties were to jointly develop properties situated at Raipur. On August 28, 2013 the plaintiff company transferred an amount of Rs. 15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs Only) through Real Time Gross Transfer (RTGS) from an account maintained at ICICI Bank, Chowringhee Branch, Kolkata - 700016 to the defendant company's bank account.
b) Subsequently, based on a meeting between both the parties it was agreed that the defendant
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for summons to be duly served or the defendant to be prevented by sufficient cause from appearing, as per Order IX Rule 13 of the C....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of proper service of summons and the defendant's right to set aside an ex-parte decree by presenting a satisfactory reason in cour....
The main legal point established is that the trial court must ensure proper service of summons and comply with the legal requirements for substituted service.
The court emphasized the necessity of effective service of summons and adherence to procedural mandates in civil proceedings.
Service of summons via email and WhatsApp is deemed valid under the Code of Civil Procedure when proof exists, and delay due to negligence in responding to litigation cannot be condoned in commercial....
Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to condone delay in appeal beyond 15 days under Section 61(2) of the IBC.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
