Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Reliance Industries Ltd. Versus Imperial Pigments (P) Ltd.

2003 (3) TMI 749 - DELHI HIGH COURT

Dated:- 25-3-2003 - V Sen, J. JUDGMENT Vikramajit Sen, 1. By these Orders, I shall dispose off the Defendants applications (under Order xxxvII Rule 3(5) read with Section 151 of the C.P.C. praying for Leave to Defend the Suit) being IAs No. 968/99 [filed by Defendant No. 2] and I.A. 1939/00 [filed by Defendant No. 1]. 2. The first question to be addressed is whether the parties had entered into a ' written contract ' on the breach of which this summary suit is founded. The Plaintiff argu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Ltd. v. Uniroll Leather India Ltd., and Beacon Electronics v. Sylvania and Laxman Ltd., 1998 (3) Apex Decisions (Delhi) 141." I may only add that if the transaction in question is covered by a single invoice or bill the party relying on it should be in a position to indubitably disclose that the adversary's attention was specifically drawn to the terms on the back of the bill, and that it consented to be bound to those terms by failing to lodge any demur. One must not lose sight of the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

, several supplies have been made and each one is covered by identical and replicated terms. I am in no manner of doubt that a written contract can be found in these invoices such as would sufficiently attract the rigours of Order xxxvII of the C.P.C. 3. The next point is obviously whether the Defendant's liability towards the sums claimed in the summary suit, or any lesser sums, is apparent on the face of the record. The Court must eschew a minute investigation into the rival cases, and if .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e has a good defense to the claim on its merits the plaintiff is not entitled to leave to sign judgment and the defendant is entitled to unconditional leave to defend, (b) If the defendant raises a trivial issue indicating that he has a fair or bona fide or reasonable defense although not a positively good defense the plaintiff is not entitled to sign judgment and the defendant is entitled to unconditional leave to defend, (c) If the defendant discloses such facts as may be deemed sufficient to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ayment into Court or furnishing security, (d) If the defendant has no defense or the defense set up is illusory or sham or practically moonshine then ordinarily the plaintiff is entitled to leave to sign judgment and the defendant is not entitled to leave to defend, (e) If the defendant has no defense or the defense is illusory or sham or practically moonshine then although ordinarily the plaintiff is entitled to leave to sign judgment, the Court may protect the plaintiff by only allowing the de .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

suit is founded. Thirty-two Invoices pertain to M/s. Sai Polymers, 307, Guru Hari Kishan Nagar, Pashim Vihar, New Delhi-110041, but this party has not been imp leaded as a Defendant. There are several Invoices pertaining to Defendant No. 1. The Plaintiff has also filed a letter dated 1.3.1995 addressed to it and authored by Defendant No. 2 on behalf of Defendant No. 1. In this letter Defendant No. 2 has voluntarily assumed "the responsibility of IMPERIAL PIGMENTS PVT. LTD. Business with RE .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

red on presentation. The letter dated March 7, 1996 is of significance, and the relevant portions read thus:- "Dear Sir, This refers to our Reconciliation of Accounts with your Consignment Agent M/s. Aqua Cross Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. and in this regard I wish to confirm the following:- 1. In respect of M/s. Chemicals India's outstandings which has been duly cleared, any interest liability arising thereof, as per your company policy up to the extent of the principal amount of ₹ 55 l .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nding credits of ₹ 94,19,036/- to our accounts, the matter is now absolutely clear to us and appropriation as given by you in your letter is acceptable to us. Therefore, we have no further queries in this regard and no claims stand against the above credits accordingly. 4. We also confirm the outstanding balance in respect of M/s. Imperial Pigments Pvt. Ltd. as on date as per enclosed statement of account, which includes the interest incidence as per your company policy up to September 30, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he Plaintiffs informing them that its debit balance of ₹ 61,62,867/-along with overdue interest is the liability of Defendant No. 1. The commitment to make payment has, however, not been adhered to by the Defendants. Apart from these letters the Plaintiff has placed on record the original cheques of Defendant No. 1 signed by Defendant No. 2 for a total of ₹ 1.90 crores, all of which have not been honoured. 5. Mr. Rajiv Sawhney, learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of both Defen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to the Defendants by the Agent and documents were drawn up only to puff-up and exaggerate the sales allegedly made by the said Agent. 6. In this context reliance has been placed by Mr. Valmiki Mehta, learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of Plaintiff, on a decision rendered by S.N. Kapoor, J. in Daya Chand Uttam Prakash Jain & Another v. Santosh Devi Sharma, where it has been held that a summary suit predicated on an "acknowledgement" signed by one partner is maintainable and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

.90 crores. So far as cheques are concerned, the Negotiable Instruments Act stipulates that there shall be a presumption as far as consideration for their issuance is concerned. This aspect of the case has not been answered by the Defendants. Although there is no material available on the record to indicate that deliveries were not effected, I need not go into this question since it is not the Defendants case that the bounced cheques were in respect of another series of transactions. Moreover th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ntrary that decision goes against the Defendants case inasmuch as I had favored the view that since that suit was not based either on dishonoured cheques or on Hundis' it was not maintainable under Order xxxvII of the Code of Civil Procedure. In that case, so far as dishonoured cheques were concerned not even a single one had been filed, and so far as Hundis were concerned none of them had been accepted by the Defendants. By reverse reasoning, where a suit is based on dishonoured cheque, the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the record as annexures to the affidavit of Dr. Anis Ansari, who is stated to be one of the Directors of Defendant No. 1. It has been deposed that by registered letters dated April 20, 1995 to the Managers of the Bank of Rajasthan and the Union Bank of India they had been informed that the "authority of Mr. K.K.Karnani has been withdrawn." This affidavit further states that this information was also conveyed to the Plaintiff by the Defendant's letter dated 20.4.1995. The Defendant& .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and accordingly has disowned any assumption of liability for the outstandings of these firms. This is in the face of the Plaintiffs submission that ownership of Defendant No. 1 and these firms is predominantly held by Defendant No. 2. It is indeed easy for Defendant No. 2 to have dispelled these allegations, but no effort in this context has been made. In this manner, the letter of Defendant No. 2 is disowned by Defendant No. 1. Significantly, no explanation or details are forthcoming as to the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

taken by Defendant No. 2 was allowed. In the Orders dated 2.9.2002 it has been noted that the Defendants have placed reliance on the Resolution dated 24.4.1995 purported to have been passed by them. The original was directed to be filed along with an affidavit of the concerned officer of the company within two weeks. Although the affidavit of Dr. Anis Ansari has been filed, the Resolution has not been placed on record. It must, therefore, be presumed that no such Resolution was passed. Furtherm .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

was for a sum of ₹ 10,00,000/-; it was dishonoured on the ground that the funds were insufficient. The fourth, fifth and sixth cheques are dated 31.1.1996 for a sum of ₹ 70,00,000/-, ₹ 60,00,000/- and ₹ 25,00,000/- respectively drawn on the Union Bank of India which were also dishonoured on the grounds of insufficient funds. Three considerations immediately emerges - firstly if the authority of Defendant No. 2 had been withdrawn, why was he still in possession of the che .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version