Back
D. KRISHNAKUMAR, P. DHANABAL
K. Aranganathan – Appellant
Versus
Aramex India Private Limited (Branch Office) represented by its Manager, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: This Appeal is filed under Section 13(1) of Commercial Courts Act, praying to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 02.08.2022 made in C.O.S.No.166 of 2022 on the file of Commercial Court at Egmore, Chennai and allow this appeal.)
P. Dhanabal, J.
1. This Appeal has been preferred as against the Decree and Judgment passed in C.O.S.No.166 of 2022 on the file of Commercial Court, Egmore dated 02.08.2022, whereby the trial Court dismissed the suit and allowed the counter claim in part by directing the plaintiff to pay a sum of Rs.3,73,390/- (Rupees three lakh seventy three thousand three hundred and ninety only) to the defendant with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of plaint (i.e. 13.8.2018) till the date of decree (i.e., 2.8.2022) and thereafter with subsequent interest at the rate of 6% per annum .
2. As against the said Decree and Judgment the plaintiff has filed this appeal.
The gist of the plaint averments:
The plaintiff is the owner of the premises of an extent of 4743 sq.ft in Plot No.1, Poomagal Street, Ekkattuthangal, Chennai. The second defendant is the Head Office and its Branch Office is the first defendant. The
The escalation clause in a tenancy agreement remains enforceable despite the lease being unregistered when the tenancy continues beyond one year.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of securing the interest of the appellants and the need for proper adjudication of claims and counter-claims before the arbitrator.
The court affirmed the validity of a lease agreement and outlined that the burden of proof for its alleged forgery lies with the disputing party, establishing principles of contract law related to da....
The court affirmed that silence in response to demands can imply acceptance of terms in a lease agreement, particularly when no evidence is presented to the contrary.
The ruling clarifies the obligations of tenants regarding payment for use and occupation of leased property amidst pending disputes.
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
