Dismissed
Vikrant Vats v. Ajay Gahlot
Delhi HCRFA/45/2025
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
Appeal against decree under Order XXXVII CPC for recovery on dishonoured cheques, passed due to delayed leave-to-defend application. The High Court found no explanation for the delay and upheld the judgment and decree.
What the court decided
AI extract
¶1
$~69
¶2
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
¶3
- % Date of Decision: 20.01.2025
¶4
- RFA 45/2025, CM APPL. 3190/2025, 3189/2025 & 3188/2025
¶5
VIKRANT VATS .....Appellant Through: Mr. Rajat Arora and Mr. Sourabh Mahla, Advocates
¶6
versus
¶7
AJAY GAHLOT .....Respondent Through: None.
¶8
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
¶9
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
¶10
- The appellant has assailed judgment and decree dated 27.11.2024, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, South West, Dwarka, Delhi under Order XXXVII CPC on account of failure on the part of the appellant to file application for leave to defend within stipulated period. Learned counsel for appellant has taken me through the relevant record already filed with the appeal. Having heard learned counsel for appellant, I find no ground to issue notice of this appeal.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
AI extract
Whether the trial court erred in decreeing the Order XXXVII suit after dismissing the late application for leave to defend.
Parties & counsel
AI extract
- appellant
Vikrant Vats
- respondent
Ajay Gahlot
Coram
AI extract
Girish Kathpalia
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court