Held that Trial Court erred in treating signature similarity as admission without admitting evidence. Dismissed rejection of leave to defend and directed disposal of suit.
Order passed by Trial Court dismissing petition to leave to defend is set aside and leave to defend suit is granted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28.08.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ
CRP.(PD)No.3049 of 2017 and CMP No.14315 of 2017
S.Rakesh Kumar ... Petitioner vs. M/s.Deekay Electrical's No. 38 Rattan Bazaar Road, Park Town, Chennai-600 003. rep. by its Manager Mr.P.Gunasekaran ... Respondent
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, against the order dated 01.03.2017 passed in I.A.No. 148 of 2016 in O.S.No. 3611 of 2016 by the Learned XVIIIth Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai dismissing the petition filed for leave to defend the above suit in O.S.No. 3611 of 2016.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Ramachandran For Respondent : Mr.Biman O R D E R
This Civil Revision Petition is directed against rejection of the petition seeking leave to defend the summary suit. The case of
2
the petitioner is that he is not the proprietor of the defendant firm and the suit is barred by limitation, whereas respondent/plaintiff would state that the defendant, by its reply notice dated 16.03.2016, has acknowledged deed and therefore, the suit is not barred by limitation.
3
leave to defend the suit, and therefore the order passed by the Trial Court is set aside and leave is granted to defend the suit. The Trial Court is directed to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible.
disposed of. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition
is closed.
28.08.2017
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Index:Yes/No
bsm
To
XV Small Causes Court,
Chennai.
4
M.GOVINDARAJ.,J.
bsm
CRP.(PD)No.3049 of 2017
and CMP No.14315 of 2017
28.08.2017
2 issues framed by the court
Whether petition for leave to defend a summary suit alleging bar under Limitation Act and non-authorisation by proprietor should be allowed.
Whether signature comparison without admitting evidence correctly constitutes admission of claim.
S.Rakesh Kumar
M/s.Deekay Electrical's
M.Govindaraj
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
