Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.17 seconds)

Radheshyam G. Garg vs Safiyabai Ibrahim Lightwalla on 19 January, 1987

16. In the case in hand, certified copy of the bank statement was produced by the officer of the bank himself in the court and perusal of the same also shows that same also bear the seal of the bank with signature. Hence, the same can be relied upon. Moreover, the plaintiff/PW1 during his cross examination and PW-3 admitted that cheques issued by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff for rent were encashed in his bank account. This admission on behalf of plaintiff and his witnesses also corroborates bank statement relied upon by the defendant. Hence in view of the above judgment i.e. Radheshyam G. Garg vs. Safiyabai Ibrahim Lightwalla (supra) this court agrees with the finding of ld. Trial Court that even though the bank statement may not be in RCA No. 13/21 Sh. Shyam Sunder Nagpal Vs. Sh. Ram Chaudhary Page No. 12/13 accordance in the provision of bankers book evidence act, however, it does prove that account of Rs.3000/- was being debited from the account of the defendant when the cheques Mark DW1/1 to DW1/9 were present for the encashment. This court is also agrees with the observation of ld. Trial court that the court should not adopt a hyper technical and rigid attitude while complying with the provisions of law. Hence, this court agrees with the finding of ld. Trial court that the suit of the plaintiff was barred u/s 50 of Delhi Rent Control Act and the suit was not maintainable.
Bombay High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 32 - Full Document
1