Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.66 seconds)The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996
The Limitation Act, 1963
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Section 4 in The Interest On Delayed Payments To Small Scale And Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993 [Entire Act]
Section 5 in The Interest On Delayed Payments To Small Scale And Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993 [Entire Act]
Section 7 in The Interest On Delayed Payments To Small Scale And Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993 [Entire Act]
R.N. Gosain A vs Yashpal Dhir on 23 October, 1992
In view of the aforesaid letters, it is clear that the defendants did not
deny the due amount by them to the plaintiff, and what all they stated
is with regard to the pendency of criminal proceedings against the
aforesaid Director of plaintiff's company, they cannot consider at that
stage. But, strangely, ignoring the aforesaid letters, in the written
statement filed by the defendants in the suit, took a contradictory
statement by denying their liability. Thus, the defendants cannot be
15
KL,J & VRKR,J
CCCA No.160 of 2006 & 131 of 2009
permitted to both approbate and reprobate as held by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in R.N. Gosain v. Yashpal Dhir1.
Union Of India And Ors vs West Coast Paper Mills Ltd. & Anr on 5 February, 2004
The said
principle was laid down by the Apex Court in Union of India v. West
Coast Paper Mills Ltd. 3.
State Of Uttar Pradesh vs Nawab Hussain on 4 April, 1977
vi) In State of Uttar Pradesh v. Nawab Hussain4 relied upon
by the defendants, the suit hit was dismissed on the ground that it was
hit by res judicata. In the case on hand, though the plaintiff sought
two reliefs in the writ petition with regard to quashing of the Circular
dated 17.05.1995 and consequential direction for payment of the
aforesaid amount, the said writ petition was dismissed. In the appeal
filed by the plaintiff, though the said circular was quashed, suit claim
was not granted. However, it was observed that all other contentions
4
. (1977) SCC 2 806
26
KL,J & VRKR,J
CCCA No.160 of 2006 & 131 of 2009
raised by the parties are left open to be agitated at an appropriate
stage. Thus, suit claim was not granted and there was no observation
or finality with regard to the amount due and the suit was filed for the
said amount, the same would not hit by res judicata. Thus, this
decision is also not applicable to the facts of the present case.