REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

SUBHASH AGGARWAL Appellant

V/S

Mahender Pal Chabra Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

DINESH KUMAR JAIN VS. SANJEEV CHAUDHARY [REFERRED TO]
NATHULAL VS. PHOOLCHAND [REFERRED TO]
NATHULAL VS. PHOOLCHAND [REFERRED TO]
NIRANJAN KUMAR VS. DHYAN SINGH [REFERRED TO]
PARAK UNNAN VEETILL JOSEPHS SON MATHEW VS. NEDUMBARA KURUVILAS SON [REFERRED TO]
N P THIRUGNANAM VS. R JAGAN MOHAN RAO [REFERRED TO]
HIS HOUNESS ACHARYA SWAMI GANESH DASSJI VS. SITA RAM THAPAR [REFERRED TO]
P DSOUZA VS. SHONDRILO NAIDU [REFERRED TO]
MAN KAUR VS. HARTAR SINGH SANGHA [REFERRED TO]
SARADAMANI KANDAPPAN VS. S RAJALAKSHMI [REFERRED TO]
SARADAMANI KANDAPPAN VS. S RAJALAKSHMI [REFERRED TO]
METROPOLIS TRAVELS AND RESORTS I PRIVATE LIMITED VS. SUMIT KALRA [REFERRED TO]
SATYA JAIN D THR. LRS VS. ANIS AHMED RUSHDIE D TR.LRS [REFERRED TO]
R.K.B.K. FISCAL SERVICES PVT. LTD. VS. ISHWAR DAYAL KANSAL [REFERRED TO]
K. PRAKASH VS. B.R. SAMPATH KUMAR [REFERRED TO]
DHEERAJ DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED VS. DR. OM PRAKASH GUPTA AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
SHRI NEELPADMAYA CONSUMER PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. VS. SATYABIR AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]
MRS. A. KANTHAMANI VS. MRS. NASREEN AHMED [REFERRED TO]
MRS. A. KANTHAMANI VS. MRS. NASREEN AHMED [REFERRED TO]
SIDHARTHA TAYAL VS. DINESH GOEL AND ANR. [REFERRED TO]
RADHAKRISHAN DHARMARTHA PVT. TRUST VS. PARAMANAD SONI THROUGH [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Preface : -

(2.) Thus, to adjudicate upon this suit, the following backdrop, which emerges from the pleadings and the record, is required to be noticed.

(3.) Be that as it may, the plaintiff claims that on 10.05.2008, he visited the house of the defendants to pay the balance amount when he was told that the defendants had left for Punjab and would return only after two weeks. The plaintiff also asserts that thereafter, he made several attempts to consummate the sale transaction which did not bear fruit and, hence, a notice dated 16.07.2008 was served on the defendants via his advocates. The plaintiff goes on to state that since no response was received qua his notice wherein he, inter alia, stated that he was and is still ready and willing to perform his part of the obligations cast upon him under the ATS, including payment of the balance sale consideration, he was propelled to institute the present suit action.

Click here to view full judgment.

SUBHASH AGGARWAL Vs. MAHENDER PAL CHABRA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address