Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, AMIT BANSAL
Grand Auto Capital – Appellant
Versus
Jindal Dyechem Industries Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of appeal against ex parte decree. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. procedural history of the appeal. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. contentions of appellants regarding non-service of summons. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 4. claims of appellants concerning access to premises. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. court's reasoning on rent payment obligations. (Para 22 , 24 , 25) |
| 6. modification of ex parte decree on mesne profits. (Para 27) |
| 7. directive for modification in execution. (Para 30 , 31) |
JUDGMENT
[VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J. This appeal was filed, impugning the order (dated 26th October, 2020 of the Commercial Court, North West District, Delhi, in Misc. D.J No. 223/2020 in CS (COMM) No. 77/2019) of dismissal of an application of the appellants/defendants under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) for setting aside of the ex parte decree dated 19th February, 2020 of ejectment of the appellants/defendants from immovable property (earlier in the tenancy of the appellants/defendants under the respondent/plaintiff on the terms and conditions contained in the registered lease deed between the parties) and for recovery from the appellants/defendants, of arrears of rent and
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
