Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.33 seconds)

Golf Technologies (P) Ltd & Anr vs Axis Bank Ltd & Ors on 1 June, 2015

and "as is what is basis". The intending participant in the said auction is therefore expected to make necessary inquiries if one can say so having regard to the general practice adopted at the time of auction. In fact in the instant matter the Plaintiff in Paragraph 6 of the plaint accepts the position that the attachment of the Income-Tax Department does not mean that there is a bar for the sale of the said property which is under attachment. It is in the said context that the maintainability of the suit was required to be considered by the Trial Court. If the test laid down in the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Jigishaben B Sanghavi's case (supra) and the judgment of the Division Bench of Madras High Court in V. Thulasi's case (supra) is applied, by taking the plaint as a whole the conclusion that is required to be drawn is that the instant suit does not fall within the exception carved out in Mardia Chemicals Ltd.'s case (supra)."
Delhi High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - M Gupta - Full Document

Golf Technologies (P) Ltd. & Anr. vs Axis Bank Ltd. & Ors. on 29 May, 2015

At this stage, it _______________________________________________________________________ CS (OS) No.4095 of 2014 Page 24 of 29 would be apposite to rely upon the judgment in Authorised Officer, Kotak Mahindra Bank v. Brahmo Construction Pvt. Ltd., CRA No. 34/2015, decided on 16.04.2015, wherein a learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court held as under:
Delhi High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 3 - N Waziri - Full Document
1