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

DELHI HIGH COURT
AMIT BANSAL
Rajiv Sareen – Appellant
Versus
Divyanshu Enterprises – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Amit Bansal, J. (Oral)

[VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]

I.A.14422/2021 (of the defendant No. 3 u/O-VII R-11 of the CPC)

1. This application has been filed on behalf of the applicant/defendant No. 3 Punjab National Bank (hereinafter referred to as the `defendant No. 3 Bank') under Order VII Rule 11 of the CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE , 1908 (CPC) seeking rejection of the plaint.

2. Notice in this application was issued on 9th November, 2021 and a reply has been filed on behalf of the non-applicant/plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the `plaintiff').

3. In the said plaint, it has been pleaded that:

(i) The plaintiff and the defendant No. 1 entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 31st July, 2017 pursuant to which the defendant No. 2 loaned Rs.25,00,000/- to the plaintiff and the plaintiff handed over the original title deed of the suit property to the defendant No. 2. As per the said MoU, the total amount to be loaned was Rs.65,00,000/-.

(ii) The defendant No. 2 did not pay the balance loan amount of Rs.40,00,000/- to the plaintiff and instead started to put pressure on the plaintiff to repay Rs.25,00,000/-.

(iii) The defendant No. 2 agreed to defer the return of the

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