citedby: 150394026

Canara Bank vs Anjali Singhal Proprietor Of M/S Shri ... on 22 August, 2025

Observations of Kalu Ram's case (Supra) apply on all force to the facts of this case. In the case in hand also despite receipt of notice respondent did not care to reply nor refuted the averments of demand of the amount on the basis of the invoices/bills in question. But the learned Trial Court failed to draw inference against the respondent.

Delhi District Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Raj Kumar Jewellers vs Durga Jewellers on 19 October, 2024

Observations of Kalu Ram's case (Supra) apply on all force to the facts of this case. In the case in hand also despite receipt of notice respondent did not care to reply nor refuted the averments of demand of the amount on the basis of the invoices/bills in question. But the learned Trial Court failed to draw inference against the respondent.

Delhi District Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Canara Bank vs M/S Luxmi Plastic on 30 August, 2025

Observations of Kalu Ram's case (Supra) apply on all force to the facts of this case. In the case in hand also despite receipt of notice respondent did not care to reply nor refuted the averments of demand of the amount on the basis of the invoices/bills in question. But the learned Trial Court failed to draw inference against the respondent.

Delhi District Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Canara Bank vs Mehboob Qureshi Prop Superfine ... on 1 July, 2025

Observations of Kalu Ram's case (Supra) apply on all force to the facts of this case. In the case in hand also despite receipt of notice respondent did not care to reply nor refuted the averments of demand of the amount on the basis of the invoices/bills in question. But the learned Trial Court failed to draw inference against the respondent.

Delhi District Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

N R Hosiery vs M/S Mangal Creation on 1 December, 2025

Observations of Kalu Ram's case (Supra) apply on all force to the facts of this case. In the case in hand also despite receipt of notice respondent did not care to reply nor refuted the averments of demand of the amount on the basis of the invoices/bills in question. But the learned Trial Court failed to draw inference against the respondent.

Delhi District Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Shri Neeraj Aggarwal vs Shri Ravinder Parkash Punj & Anr on 29 October, 2025

Observations of Kalu Ram's case (Supra) apply on all force to the facts of this case. In the case in hand also despite receipt of notice respondent did not care to reply nor refuted the averments of demand of the amount on the basis of the invoices/bills in question. But the learned Trial Court failed to draw inference against the respondent."

Delhi High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Somani Kanak Seedz Pvt Ltd vs Suman Dangi on 8 September, 2025

Reference was made to proceedings reported in Kalu Ram Vs. Sita Ram 1980 RLR (note) 44 wherein it had been observed that service of notice being admitted without reservation and that having not been replied, in that eventuality adverse inference should be drawn.

Delhi District Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sh. Nagender Kumar vs Anita Tiwari on 6 August, 2022

28. Ld. Civil Judge has relied upon the two judgments, i.e. Abdul Gaffar vs DDA 90 (2001) DLT 330, and Kalu Ram vs Sita Ram 1980 RLR (Note) 44 to hold that adverse inference had RCA DJ No. 11/22 Nagendra Kumar & Anr. Vs. Anita Tiwari Page 22 of 28 Dinesh Kumar/ADJ-02/South/Saket/ND/06.08.2022. to be drawn against the defendants as they had not replied to the legal notice sent by the plaintiff.

Delhi District Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Bank Of Baroda vs Sanjay Kumar on 16 May, 2025

Reference was made to proceedings reported in Kalu Ram Vs. Sita Ram 1980 RLR (note) 44 wherein it had been observed that service of notice Suit (Ex-parte) "Decreed" Page 13 of 15 CS (Comm) 421/2024 Bank of Baroda Vs. Sanjay Kumar being admitted without reservation and that having not been replied, in that eventuality adverse inference should be drawn.

Delhi District Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Bank Of Baroda vs Mukesh on 26 August, 2025

Observations of Kalu Ram's case (Supra) apply on all force to the facts of this case. In the case in hand also despite receipt of notice respondent did not care to reply nor refuted the averments of demand of the amount on the basis of the invoices/bills in question. But the learned Trial Court failed to draw inference against the respondent.

Delhi District Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Search Results Page

Refine Search

Search Results