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

2024 Supreme(Del) 651

ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI
Jatin Jain – Appellant
Versus
Anuj Jain – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Mr. Siddharth Yadav, Senior Advocate with Ms. Nitika Mangla and Mr. Ankit Chadha, Advocates, for the Petitioner.

JUDGMENT

Anup Jairam Bhambhani J.

1. The present suit has been filed as an ordinary civil suit.

2. Vide last order dated 29.02.2024, Mr. Siddharth Yadav, learned senior counsel appearing for the plaintiffs was queried as to why the present suit should not be treated as a `commercial suit, under the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act 2015 (`Commercial Courts Act.), since the claims made by way of the suit appear to arise from a partnership agreement. Mr. Yadav was heard in the matter on 29.02.2024; and had sought further time to cite certain judicial precedents.

3. Mr. Yadav argues that the suit is maintainable as an ordinary civil suit.

4. It is the submission of learned senior counsel, that the subject matter of the present suit are the sale proceeds of property bearing No.249-A, Udyog Vihar, Phase-IV, Gurugram, Haryana which property was at one stage property of the partnership firm. He submits however, that once the sale proceeds were credited to the personal account of the plaintiffs' father/husband (who was one of the partners of the partnership firm), the character of the funds changed, and it can no longer be said that the funds relate to the partnership firm or that the cla

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