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

2000 Supreme(Del) 49

VIKRAMAJIT SEN
THOMSON PRESS INDIA LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
MEGH AND COMPANY – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Harish Gupta, S.D.SALWAN

Delhi High Court

(January 20,2000) 2000 (TLS)101376

2000-DLT-84-475 :: 2000-AD (Del)-3-238

THOMSON PRESS INDIA LIMITED Vs. Megh and Company

Vikramajit Sen,. J.

( 1 ) THIS application has been filed under the provisions of Order XII Rule 6, although at the time of arguments Order VIII Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code was also pressed into support by learned counsel for the Plaintiff. It is prayed in the application that the suit be decreed since, in the Written Statement filed on behalf of Defendants 3 and 4, the statements of facts contained in the plaint have been admitted. Defendants 3 and 4 have filed a Reply to this application in which it has been submitted that the Written Statement should be read as a whole and that if so read it would not reveal any admission on their part. In support of this submission learned counsel for Defendants 3 and 4 relied on Dudh Nath Pandey (Dead By L. R s) V. Suresh Chandra Bhattasali (dead by L. R s), AIR 1986 SC 1509. This case undoubtedly sets down the proposition canvassed by him. However, it has to be seen, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, whether in fact admissions have been made in the Written Statement of the averments
























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