Back
SUPREME COURT
, J
State Bank of Travancore v. M/s. Kingston Computers(I) P. Ltd.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to the authority of the director to file the suit is central. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. trial court's findings on authorizations were pivotal. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. absence of proper evidence for authorization led to dismissal. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 4. the appeal is allowed due to lack of valid authority. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
1. Delay condoned.
2. Leave granted.
3. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court whereby the appeal preferred by respondent - M/s.Kingston Computers (I) Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as "the company") was allowed and the suit filed by it for recovery of Rs.8,50,952/- along with interest of Rs.3,06,342/- was decreed by reversing the judgment of Additional District Judge, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the trial Court").
4. The suit was filed by the respondent through Shri Ashok K.Shukla, who described himself as one of the Directors of the company and claimed that he was authorised by Shri Raj K.Shukla, the Chief Executive Officer of the company vide authority letter dated 02.01.2003 to sign, verify and file suit for recovery on behalf of the company. A copy of the authority letter allegedly
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
