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

2012 Supreme(Del) 2487

INDERMEET KAUR
G. P. Bhatia – Appellant
Versus
Deekayinc & Ors – Respondent


Advocates:
Through Mr. Manish Makhija, Adv., Through Mr. P.L. Malik, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

Indermeet Kaur, J.

1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 29.09.2011 whereby the application filed by the defendant seeking leave to defend had been allowed; leave to defend had been granted to the defendant in the pending suit filed by the plaintiff under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code').

2. Record shows that the present suit has been filed by the plaintiff seeking recovery of Rs. 12,65,044/-. Contention of the plaintiff was that the parties had business dealings with one another; the plaintiff was a wholesale dealer of various products including push buttons and cordless phones for reputed companies; the director of defendant No. 1 was purchasing goods from the plaintiff for and on behalf of defendant No.1; the parties had business dealings; plaintiff was maintaining a running account. In March, 2007, the defendant started defaulting in payment. Certain amounts were paid thereafter; balance confirmations were executed by the defendant on 15.07.2006 and 01.06.2009. Legal notice dated 22.12.2009 was sent by the plaintiff to the defendants calling upon them to pay the aforenoted amount of Rs. 12,65,044/-















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