Back
VIBHU BAKHRU, AMIT MAHAJAN
Crompton Greaves Consumer Electricals Limited – Appellant
Versus
Kay Ess Electronics And Electricals – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Vibhu Bakhru, J. (Oral)
1. The appellant has filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 15.11.2022 passed by the learned Commercial Court under Order VII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereafter 'CPC').
2. The appellanta/plaintiff had filed the aforesaid suit inter alia praying for a decree for a sum of Rs.1,66,60,555/- (Rupees One Crore Sixty Six Lakhs Sixty Thousand Five Hundred Fifty Five only) along with the interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the month of July 29, 2016, to the date of institution of the suit. The plaint was filed on 01.03.2019.
3. Although, the appellant had prayed for pre-suit interest; it did not quantify for the same. In addition, the appellant has also prayed for the payment of pendente lite interest at the rate of 18% per annum on the principal amount claimed (that is, Rs.1,66,60,555/- plus interest at the rate of 18% per annum from 29.07.2016 to 01.03.2019).
4. Respondent No. 1 (Defendant No. 1) in the suit is a firm constituted by defendant No. 2 and 3 (respondent No. 2 and 3 in the present appeal). The office of respondent No. 1 firm, falls within the territorial jurisdiction of the District Court at Dwarka. Th
Under-valuation of the suit and entitlement to claim interest
The time for correction of valuation shall not be extended unless exceptional circumstances are pleaded, and the refusal to extend such time would cause grave injustice to the plaintiff.
Jurisdiction over commercial transactions and the application of procedural rules for returning plaints to the appropriate Court.
Point of law: Court Fee - It is evident that the Court has to find cut that the claim is under valued. Then at least require the plaintiff to correct the valuation and fix a time to pay deficit Court....
For a suit to be considered a commercial dispute, it should meet both the requirements of falling within the definition of a commercial dispute and having a specified value of more than Rs. 3 lakhs. ....
The admission of invoices by a defendant can lead to a summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC, and jurisdiction is determined by the location of the cause of action.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the registered office of a defendant determines the territorial jurisdiction of a court, and a clause in a contract ousting the jurisdictio....
It is the settled position that the relief of injunction under Section 26(c) of the Act has to be valued on the basis of the advantage sought to be derived or the loss to be averted by the plaintiff.
The Executing Court cannot reassess a decree's validity on jurisdictional grounds after the decree has attained finality; jurisdictional issues can only be raised during original proceedings.
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
