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

2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 31575

HIGH COURT OF DELHI
NAVIN CHAWLA, J
BHARAT KUMAR CHAUDHARY – Appellant
Versus
NAVIN MALHOTRA – Respondent


Advocates:
Mr.Raj Kumar Mishra, Adv.

J U D G M E N T

1. The present Suit has been filed by the plaintiff praying for Decree to be passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant for a sum of Rs.03.50 crores along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. Herein, it is relevant to note that when the Suit was filed, only defendant no.1 was impleaded as defendant, later, the plaintiff moved an application, being I.A. 4584/2019, to implead defendant no.2. The said application was allowed by this Court vide Order dated 22.05.2023, impleading defendant no.2, however, the plaintiff did not move any application seeking corresponding amendment to the plaint.

Case of the Plaintiff

2. It is the case of the plaintiff that the plaintiff was an employee of the defendant and worked under the Chairmanship of the Signature Not Verified CS(OS) 28/2015 Page 1 of 20 Digitally Signed defendant’s company/organization/Star Bazar from 2006 to 2013, which was situated at Kailash Colony, New Delhi. During the course of such employment, the defendant took and kept signed dated and undated documents and cheques by the plaintiff in good faith.

3. The plaintiff further asserts that the aforesaid company/organization/Star Bazar was closed

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