Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M R.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J
Simplex Infrastructures Limited – Appellant
Versus
Malini Ganesh – Respondent
ORDER :
This civil revision petition challenges the order passed by the learned XXII Additional City Civil Judge, Chennai, in I.A.No.3 of 2024 in O.S.No.5988 of 2023 dated 10.06.2024.
2.For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as plaintiff and defendant.
3.The civil revision petitioner is the defendant in the suit.
4.O.S.No.5988 of 2023 is a suit for recovery of money. The plaintiff is a practising Lawyer enrolled with the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry. She had been engaged by the defendant for performance of professional services. Work orders had been issued by the defendant to the plaintiff. It related to certain arbitration proceedings wherein the defendant was one of the parties to the proceedings.
5.Towards her professional services already rendered, the plaintiff had raised invoices on the defendant. The defendant defaulted in payment of the same. When the plaintiff called upon the defendant to settle the dues, the defendant gave an assurance that it will do so. Part payments were made thereafter. Full settlement was not arrived at. The plaintiff submitted a final invoice on 04.10.2021. She also sent reminders subsequently. Apart from making part pa
Entering appearance in interlocutory applications constitutes sufficient notice, negating claims of non-service of summons in summary suits.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of the provisions of Order XXXVII Rule 4 and Rule 3(4) of CPC regarding the service of summons for judgment in a....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of proper service of summons as per the requirements of Order V Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The judgment emphasized the importance of following the prescribed procedure for service of summons for judgment under Order XXXVII CPC and the need to consider the impact of an already implemented d....
Point of Law : Order of the learned Trial Judge rejecting the application for leave to defend on merits, ought to be substituted by an order rejecting that application as premature.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of following the mandatory procedures for service of summons under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and the insufficiency of subst....
The prescribed format of summons for a suit filed under Order XXXVII remains the same, whether the suit is filed as a Commercial Suit or an Ordinary Suit, and the defendant's failure to enter appeara....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that leave to defend should not be refused unless the defendant's contentions are frivolous and do not raise any triable issue. The court emphasize....
Order XXXVII is not intended to allow parties to extend the scope of Order XXXVII CPC so as to allow filing of the suits when amounts which are claimed in the suit do not directly spring and arise fr....
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
