MUKUL MUDGAL, J.B.GOEL
ASHOK LEYLAND FINANCE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
MARUTI UDYOG LIMITED – Respondent
( 1 ) THIS is an application on behalf of the plaintiff under Order XII, Rule 6 Civil Procedure Code, seeking a partial decree op the basis of admissions said to be made by the defendant No. 1 in its written statement.
( 2 ) THE learned counsel for the plaintiff has relied upon the averments regarding admissions made by defendant No. 1 in its written statement to the following effect:-
"para 3 The answering defendant cannot be held liable for the acts of omission or commission by or on behalf of defendant No. 2 as also specifically stated in para 18 of Dealership Agreement. The defendant No. 2 used to book the vehicles and accept the payment from the customers. The answering defendant in lieu of the payment received by it from the defendant no. 2 delivered vehicles to defendant No. 2 and the invoices were also raised in the name of defendant No. 2. Para 7 - In so far as the payment of price to the dealer for the booking of vehicle is concerned, it is submitted that the customer makes the payment to the dealer by way of demand draft in favour of this defendant - Para 9 - On termination of the dealership of the defendant no. 2, all pending booking of defendant no. 2. were
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.