Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: SCJ PLASTICS in M/S Grippers India vs Go Auto Pvt Limited / Treo Tata on 19 March, 2024Matching Fragments
15. Ld. Counsel for plaintiff draws my attention to the incoherencies and errors in written statement of Defendants. Ld. Counsel submits that in view of admission of transactions and having paid part amount against work done/goods supplied by plaintiff, Defendants cannot deny their claims and plaintiff is entitled for the amount prayed. Ld. Counsel would submit that once having utilized/accepted the goods without intimating the seller (plaintiff) of any objection, the same are deemed to be accepted and hence the liability arises. Ld. Counsel would submit that once the Invoices were raised and after having received such goods, defendants cannot avoid their liability on flimsy and sham pleas. To buttress his submissions, ld. counsel has relied upon Judgments of SCJ Plastics Ltd. Vs. Creative Wares Ltd. (DOD 24.07.2012; B.L. Kashyap and Sons Ltd. Vs. M/s. JMS Steels and Power Corporation & Anr (DOD 18.01.2022) ; M/s. Lohmann Rausher Gmbh. Vs. M/s. Medisphere Marketing Pvt. Ltd. (DOD 13.01.2005); Mohanlal Manilal Vs. Firm Dhirubhai Bavajibhai and M/s Star Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. M/s. Beharilal Madanlal Jaipuria Ltd. & Ors. (DOD 16.12.2021).