Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Vibhu Bakhru, Tejas Karia
CNR Exports – Appellant
Versus
Mohd. Qadeer Prop. Of M/S Mehtab Export House – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
VIBHU BAKHRU, J.
1. The appellant (defendant in the suit) has filed the present appeal under Section 13(2) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 read with Order XLI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [hereafter the CPC], impugning a judgment dated 13.09.2024 [hereafter the impugned judgment] passed by the learned District Judge (Commercial Court)-04 [hereafter the Commercial Court], in CS (COMM) 614/2022 titled Mohd. Qadeer v. M/s CNR Exports.
2. The respondent (hereafter also referred to as the plaintiff) had filed the said suit [CS (COMM) No.614/2022] for recovery of a sum of Rs.3,73,383/- along with pendente lite and future interest at the rate of 24% per annum till the date of realization of the said amount. Additionally, the plaintiff had also sought a decree for costs and litigation charges. The learned Commercial Court allowed the aforementioned suit by the impugned judgment and decreed a sum of Rs.3,73,383/- along with pendente lite and future interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the filing of the suit till the date of realization.
FACTUAL CONTEXT
3. The appellant (hereafter also referred to as the defendant) is a sole proprietorship concern of Mr Vina
The burden of proof lies on the party asserting a claim, and failure to provide credible evidence results in upholding the original judgment.
In a suit based on invoices, the invoices must be treated as a written contract. If the Defendant raises no genuine triable issues or the defense is frivolous, the Plaintiff shall be entitled to judg....
The plaintiff failed to prove defects in goods supplied under the Reseller Agreement, resulting in dismissal of the suit and a decree for the defendant's counter-claim for unpaid invoices.
The unauthorized sale of goods by one party constitutes a breach of contract, entitling the other party to recover payments made along with interest.
The burden of proof lies on the defendants to provide documentary evidence of full payment, and failure to do so may result in adverse inferences by the Court.
The absence of certification under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, does not render computer-generated ledger accounts inadmissible, and the non-examination of the person who made entrie....
The plaintiff successfully proved the delivery of goods and the defendant's liability for unpaid dues, entitling the plaintiff to recover the amount with interest.
Money suit – Demand raised against supply of goods has to be allowed.
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
