Remanded

M/S. Nova Shares and Securities a Partnership Rep. by Partners Mr. Rajesh Chedda and Anr. v. Ms. Kucku Verghese Rep by Mrs. Elizabeth Chandi and Anr.

Bombay HC6 Feb 2014CA/154/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In second appeal, the High Court admitted questions of law regarding evidence, limitation, and agency. The court stayed the impugned judgment pending disposal, requiring deposit of the decretal amount within eight weeks. The companion civil application was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Stay of impugned judgment pending final disposal subject to deposit of decretal amount.

M/S. Nova Shares and Securities a Partnership Rep. by… — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

¶3

SECOND APPEAL NO. 91 OF 2013

¶4

M/s. Nova Shares And Securities A Partnership Rep. By Partners Mr. Rajesh Chedda And Anr. .....Applicants Versus Ms. Kucku Verghese Rep By Mrs. Elizabeth Chandi And Anr. .....Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 154 OF 2013 M/s. Nova Shares And Securities A Partnership Rep. By Partners Mr. Rajesh Chedda And Anr. .....Applicants Versus Ms. Kucku Verghese Rep By Mrs. Elizabeth Chandi And Anr. .....Respondents Mr. S.M. Singbal, Advocate for the Appellants. Mr. Ryan Menezes, Advocate for the Respondents. CORAM : U.V. BAKRE, J. DATE : 06/02/2014 P.C.: Heard Mr. S.M. Singbal, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants and Mr. Ryan Menezes, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.

¶5

¶6

Admit on the following questions of law:

¶7

i. Whether, in the light of the fact that the alleged Promissory Note is not adduced in evidence, nor exhibited in evidence by the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 on account of the objection by the Appellants on account of deficient stamp duty, the Learned Ad-hoc District Judge-I, (FTC), North Goa, at Panaji was right in passing the Impugned Judgment and Decree by allowing the entire Suit on the basis of the alleged Promissory Note?

¶8

ii. Whether, the Learned Ad-hoc District Judge-I, (FTC), North Goa, at Panaji was right in substituting the view of the Trial Court that in the absence of the Promissory Note being admitted in evidence, no presumption under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be raised?

¶9

iii. Whether, the Learned Ad-hoc District Judge-I, (FTC), North Goa, at Panaji was right in looking into the Power of Attorney, the original of which has not been produced on record and over ruling the finding that there is no Power of Attorney which has been exhibited in evidence and there is also no authority for PW1 to file the Suit in the name of the Respondent nos. 1 and 2?

¶10

¶11

iv. Whether the finding of the Learned Ad-hoc District Judge – 1, (FTC), North Goa, at Panaji that the suit is within limitation is untenable in law?

¶12

v. Whether the First Appellate Court failed in not considering the application of Goa Money Lenders Act to the present case and thus erred in this regard.

¶13

In view of the admission of the Second Appeal and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned Judgment and Order dated 22/03/2013 is stayed until the final disposal of the appeal, subject to appellants depositing the entire decreetal amount in this court within a period of 8 (eight) weeks from today. Civil Application no. 154 of 2013 stands disposed of accordingly.

¶14

U.V. BAKRE, J.

¶15

M/S. Nova Shares and Securities a Partnership Rep. by Partners Mr. Rajesh Chedda and Anr. v. Ms. Kucku Verghese Rep by Mrs. Elizabeth Chandi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Nova Shares and Securities a Partnership Rep. by Partners Mr. Rajesh Chedda and Anr. v. Ms. Kucku Verghese Rep by Mrs. Elizabeth Chandi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri. Gokuldas Kumbharjuvenkar Vs the Chief Secretary, State of Goa, Govt. of Goa and Anr.

Shri Pradeep P. Duggal and 2 Ors., Vs Mr. Sarvesh Uttam Sawant and 19 Ors.

M/S Parwani Builders Vs State of Goa Rep. by Goa Tillari Irrigation Development Corporation Thorugh Its Executive Engineer

The New India Insurance Co. Ltd. by Its Senior Divisional Manager Smt. Neera Saxena Vs Ms. Jolene Caren Gonsalves Represented by Shri. Anthony Carlos Gonsalves and 2 Ors.

M/S. Nova Shares and Securities a Partnership Rep. by Partners Mr. Rajesh Chedda and Anr. Vs Mr. Abraham Chandi Rep. by His Mother Mrs. Elizabeth Chandi and 2 Ors.

M/S. Nova Shares and Securities a Partnership, Rep. by Partnersm, Mr. Rajesh Chedda and Anr. Vs Mrs. Elizabeth Chandy and 2 Ors.