Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.55 seconds)
Documents citing Delhi Book Store vs Shri K.S. Subramaniam, Sole ... on 11 August, 2005

K.Amarender Reddy vs Ashok Kumar Agarwal on 5 July, 2024

In this regard, the learned counsel for the plaintiff relied upon a decision in M/s. Delhi Book Store v. K.S. Subramaniam 6, wherein the High Court of Delhi observed that the onus is on the defendant to 6 AIR 2006 Delhi 206 16 MGP, J ccca_35_2022 explain as to he had issued cheques in favour of the plaintiff. In such circumstances, the defence raised by the defendant against the plaintiff in the petition filed under Order XXXVII Rule 3 (5) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure appearing to be vexatious, moonshine, sham, illusionary and not leading to any triable issues. The grounds urged by the defendant in the petition vide I.A.No.828 of 2021 are not worthy enough to shatter the case of the plaintiff.
Telangana High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Suit No: 7/12 vs M/S. Samrat Bicycle on 13 February, 2013

4. I have heard arguments on behalf of the parties and perused the file. Plaintiff has relied upon M/s. Punjab Pen House Vs. M/s. Samrat Bicycle Ltd. AIR 1992 Delhi 1 in support of the plea that when goods were supplied against bills on terms and conditions agreed between the parties then it amounted to contract between the parties sufficient to cover the suit U/o 37 :3: Clause 2(b) CPC. This ratio was followed in Beacon Electronics Vs. M/s. Sylavania & Laxman Ltd: 1998 III AD (Delhi) 141. Further reliance has been placed on M/s. Delhi Book Store Vs. K.S. Subramaniam 2006 I AD (Delhi) 557 to the effect that stand taken in leave application is not only in contradiction to his own documents but apparently afterthought and lacked bonafide. Holding defence to be sham, the application was dismissed. In Indian Bank Vs. M/s. Cheese Wafers (India) Pvt. Ltd. 76 (1998) DLT 892 it was held that where there is unambiguous and unequivocal acknowledgment of liability by the defendant to specific averments of plaintiff, the claim that no dues are payable in sham and devoid of any force.
Delhi District Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Rohtash Kumar vs Sonu @ Inder Raj on 19 May, 2011

In the case of Delhi Book Store v. K. S. Subramaniam AIR 2006 Del 206, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi declined leave to defend which was sought on the ground that the articles against which cheques were issued had never been supplied to the defendant. The Hon'ble High Court questioned as to why cheques were issued by the defendant if articles had not been supplied to him. Similarly, in the present case, the defendant has not been able to convincingly explained as to why he executed the promissory note, receipt and affidavit if loan had not been advanced to him.
Delhi District Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 Next