DELHI HIGH COURT
C.HARI SHANKAR
Tajunissa – Appellant
Versus
Vishal Sharma – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. issuance of summons and demurrer. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. plaintiffs' allegations of fraud against defendant. (Para 9 , 10 , 12) |
| 3. jurisdiction of civil court under sarfaesi act. (Para 13 , 19) |
| 4. fraud allegations and civil court jurisdiction. (Para 15 , 23) |
| 5. rejection of objections and order for suit. (Para 28 , 29) |
JUDGMENT
The Background
1. Mr. Ravi Gupta, learned Senior Counsel for Defendant 3, the Kotak Mahindra Bank ("the Bank", hereinafter) vehemently opposed the issuance of summons in this suit and submitted that, even without any pleadings being invited by the Court or being placed on record by his client, he desired to advance submissions, orally, as would persuade this Court to dismiss the suit in limine in exercise of the jurisdiction vested in it by Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ("the CPC").
2. No application under Order VII Rule 11 has been moved by the defendant. No pleadings by the defendant are on record. As Mr. Gupta has chosen to argue sans any pleadings, the submissions in the plaint have, for the purposes of this application, to be treated as admitted, at least for the present and for the purpose of consideration of the obj
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.