Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.23 seconds)

Ms Auto Movers vs Luminous Power Technologies Pvt Ltd on 16 September, 2021

During arguments, it is not disputed by Ld. Counsel for defendant that payment of Rs. 4 lacs was not made in RBL Bank which is situated in Rajouri Garden. Defendant has not given any suggestion to PW-1 that defendant is not having any office at Kirti Nagar, Delhi. So, the plaintiff is able to prove that defendant has made payment of Rs. 4 lacs in RBL Bank account of plaintiff which is situated in Rajouri Garden. Reliance can be placed on judgment titled as "M/s. Auto Movers Vs. Luminous Power Technologies Pvt. Ltd." wherein, it is held that "when, in the present case, the part cause of action has arisen also on account of the payments made by the petitioner/ defendant directly into the bank account of the respondent/plaintiff, even if these were not on regular basis, since there is nothing to show that the place of payment had been fixed, even without following the principle that the "debtor must seek out the creditor", it is clear that the Delhi Courts have jurisdiction to try the suit and the invoices does not vest jurisdiction in a court which had no jurisdiction at all".
Delhi High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 45 - A Menon - Full Document

Central Bank Of India vs Ravindra And Ors on 18 October, 2001

25. Issue No. 4-Whether the plaintiff is entitled forinterest on the amount of Rs. 11,49,459/-, if yes at what rate and for what period ? (OPP) The plaintiff has claimed interest @ 18% per annum from the defendant. Ld. Counsel for plaintiff has drawn my attention towards invoices, wherein, it is mentioned that "All delayed CS (Comm.) No. 359/2024 -18- payments will attract interest @ @18% p.a.". Reliance can be placed in this regard on the judgment of Central Bank of India Vs Ravindra & Ors MANU/SC/0663/2001 passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. In this judgment it is held that according to stroud's Judicial dictionary of Words and Phrases interest means, inter alia, compensation paid by the borrower to the lender for deprivation of the use of his money.
Supreme Court of India Cites 38 - Cited by 973 - Full Document

Secretary Irrigation Department ... vs G.C. Roy on 12 December, 1991

In Secretary, Irrigation Department, Government of Orissa & Ors Vs G. C. Roy Manu/ SC/0297/1992 (1992) 2 SCC 508, it is held that the constitution bench opined that a person deprived of the use of money to which he is legitimately entitled has a right to be compensated for the deprivation, call it by any name. It may be called interest, compensation or damages. This is the principles of Section 34 CPC.
Supreme Court of India Cites 39 - Cited by 639 - K N Singh - Full Document

Dr. Shamlal Narula vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Punjab on 9 April, 1964

In this judgment, Judgment of Dr. shamlal Narula Vs CIT Punjab MANU/ SC/0109/1964 (53) was also relied upon wherein it is held that interest is paid for the deprivation of the use of the money. In this judgment it is also held that in whatever category "interest in a particular case may be put, it is a consideration paid either for the use of money or for forbearance in demanding it, after it has fallen due, and thus, it is charge for the use of forbearance of money. In this sense, it is a compensation allowed by law or fixed by parties, or permitted by customs or usage, for use of money, belonging to another, or of the delay in paying money after it has become payable.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 95 - Full Document
1   2 Next