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

2014 Supreme(Raj) 1043

NISHA GUPTA
Gem Palace – Appellant
Versus
Ajay Kasliwal – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellant:Sukriti Kasliwal, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Sandeep Pathiak, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

1. - This appeal has been preferred under Section 104 read with Order 43 Rule 1 CPC against the impugned order dated 21.12.2013 passed by Additional District Judge No.4, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur in Civil Misc. Case No. 115/2013 whereby application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC has been dismissed.

2. The short facts of the case are that appellant firm filed a Civil Suit for declaration, permanent injunction and damages against the respondents. Along with the civil suit, application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC has also been filed. It has been pleaded in the application that appellant firm is running the business of manufacturing and selling gems and jewellery in the name and style of The Gem Palace uninterruptedly since 1852 and he has a registered office at MI Road, Jaipur. The firm is engaged in the business since 1852 and firm enjoys huge reputation and he has acquired a goodwill over the years in the line of Jewellery business not only in India but abroad also. The firm was duly registered on 5.11.1964 under the provisions of Indian Partnership Act, the respondent No.1 was also the partner of the firm who has retired from the firm on 25.1.2012 and a deed of retir


















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