The Court dismissed the defendants' applications seeking leave ...

Court Denies Defendants' Right to Defend; Claims of Discretionary Repayment Deemed Frivolous and Without Merit.

November 6, 2024

Case Laws Indian Laws HC

The Court dismissed the defendants' applications seeking leave to defend the suit, as their defence was found to be frivolous, vexatious, and without any merit. The defendants admitted their liability to repay the amount claimed by the plaintiff but contended that the repayment was contingent upon an uncertain future event, solely at their discretion. The Court held that admitting liability while claiming non-repayment based on their inability to pay at their sole discretion is a moonshine defence. As the defendants failed to disclose any substantial or genuine defence, leave to defend was rightly refused under Order XXXVII Rule 3(5) of the CPC. The denial of leave is an exception when the defendant has practically no defence or raises only frivolous and vexatious issues without any semblance of triable issues.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The Court dismissed the defendants' applications seeking leave ...

Court Denies Defendants' Right to Defend; Claims of Discretionary Repayment Deemed Frivolous and Without Merit.

November 6, 2024

Case Laws Indian Laws HC

You may also like:

Dishonor of Cheque - right to defend - If the Court finds that the defence is wholly moonshine and sham, then leave to defend is liable to rejected; but if the defence...

Maintainability of an interim application seeking summary judgment under the Code of Civil Procedure for enforcing claims arising from bunker supplies made to defendant...

The High Court considered the legality of a penalty imposed u/s 31(3) of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981, due to the want of Form 28B. The issue was whether the defendants...

Plaintiff contended defendants have no real prospect of successfully defending suit claim. Court held limitation issue raised by defendants requires further examination...

Suit decreed partially for recovery, doctrine of lis pendens applied. Agreement dated 17.08.1990 not found fraudulent or result of collusion between plaintiff and...

Plaintiff filed suit for recovery of money. Defendant failed to rebut presumption u/s 118 of Negotiable Instruments Act by not proving lack of consideration through...

The Supreme Court considered the Condonation of Delay in filing an appeal for compensation enhancement, analyzing the applicability of Limitation Act provisions. The...

The High Court dismissed the application filed by the plaintiffs seeking an order to require the defendants to secure an amount of Rs. 1,14,88,833/- until the disposal...

Grant of Regular Bail - fraudulent passing of Input Tax Credit without actual supply of goods - While acknowledging the seriousness of the charges, the court noted the...

The High Court held that u/s 14(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), while a moratorium prohibits institution or continuation of suits against the corporate...

Deemed dividend u/s 2(22))e) - repayment of loan or advance by the Company

The original appellant (now deceased) was represented by her son as her legal representative. The suit initially sought a permanent prohibitory injunction regarding a...

HC granted conditional leave to defend the suit to the Defendant on the issue of wrongful detention charges. The key question was whether a detention-cum-demurrage...

Dishonor of Cheque - Plaint was filed that Cheque was issued as security and misused by the defendant - Jurisdiction of Revisional Court in rejecting the plaint - In the...

The High Court addressed a challenge to an adjudication order u/s 78 of Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 174 of CGST Act, 2017. The Court emphasized that while...

Quick Updates: