Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Rajesh Madanlal Anand vs Rakesh Madanlal Anand on 1 October, 2019
Bench: Uday Umesh Lalit, Indu Malhotra
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
INHERENT JURISDICTION
R.P.(C) No. 2041/2019 in SLP(C) No. 9089/2019
RAJESH MADANLAL ANAND Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
RAKESH MADANLAL ANAND & ANR. Respondent(s)
O R D E R
Applications seeking oral hearing in open Court and to argue in-person are rejected.
The challenge to the grant of leave to defend to the defendant in a Summary Suit filed by the Petitioner was rejected by the High Court. It was observed by the High Court:-
“3. After hearing the petitioner, who appeared in-person, I do not find any merit in the present petition. The suit was filed under Order XXXVII of the Code, claiming the amount on the basis of the cheque of Rs.59,00,000/-, issued by the late mother of the petitioner in his favour. It is claimed that the same was in view of 25% share of the total dividend received by her. The defendants in the suit are brother and sister of the petitioner. The factum of issuance of cheque was denied by the mother of the petitioner when she was alive and further any negotiation between Signature Not Verified the parties was also denied. The petitioner had Digitally signed by even filed a Complaint under Section 138 of the INDU MARWAH Date: 2019.10.05 11:03:49 IST Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which was Reason:
dismissed, as the mother, who had allegedly issued the cheque, expired. For theft of the cheque, even FIR was also got registered against the daughter of the petitioner, which is pending at 2 Matunga, Police Station, Mumbai.
4. Keeping the aforesaid facts in view, in my opinion, the court below has not committed any error in granting leave to defend to the respondents.” The decision of the High Court was affirmed while dismissing the Special Leave Petition.
We have gone through the Review Petition and do not find any error apparent on record to justify interference in Review Jurisdiction.
This Review Petition is dismissed.
........................J. (UDAY UMESH LALIT ........................J. (INDU MALHOTRA) NEW DELHI, October 1, 2019 3 ITEM NO.1002 SECTION XVI-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS R.P.(C) No. 2041/2019 in SLP(C) No. 9089/2019 RAJESH MADANLAL ANAND Petitioner(s) VERSUS RAKESH MADANLAL ANAND & ANR. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and IA No.116593/2019-PERMISSION TO APPEAR AND ARGUE IN PERSON and IA No.116594/2019-APPLICATION FOR LISTING REVIEW PETITION IN OPEN COURT IA No. 116594/2019 - APPLICATION FOR LISTING REVIEW PETITION IN OPEN COURT IA No. 116593/2019 - PERMISSION TO APPEAR AND ARGUE IN PERSON) Date : 01-10-2019 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDU MALHOTRA By Circulation UPON perusing papers the Court made the following O R D E R Applications seeking oral hearing in open Court and to argue in-person are rejected.
This Review Petition is dismissed in terms of the signed order.
Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(INDU MARWAH) (SUMAN JAIN) COURT MASTER BRANCH OFFICER
(Signed order is placed on the file)