Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Kirit Kothari vs Swaminarayan Aksharapith on 18 November, 2013

Author: Debangsu Basak

Bench: Debangsu Basak

A    18.11.                                 F.M.A.T.1243 of 2013
30                                                 With
     2013
ns                                          CAN 10288 of 2013



                                             Kirit Kothari.

                                                - Versus -

                                         Swaminarayan Aksharapith.


              Mr. Misith Mukherjee,
              Mr. Biswajit Dirghayi             .....           for the respondent.

The respondent issued a notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act upon the appellant. The appellant challenged the notice by filing a civil suit, inter alia, claiming that the said notice was not tenable in law and prayed for consequential injunction restraining the respondent from proceeding with the said notice. The learned Judge held, the suit was barred by Section 41(b) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. The judgment is apt that would deserve no interference.

The appeal is dismissed along with the application without any order as to costs.

This dismissal, however, would not preclude the appellant to contest the proceeding, if any, initiated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act on the plea available to him including those taken in the suit.

Urgent certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties, on priority basis.

( Banerjee, Acting Chief Justice ) ( Debangsu Basak, J. )