M/S Hyline Auto Components Private Limited v. M/S Haryana Ispat Udyog And Others




    
     

 !

  "#$%&'

( 



)*+,
   ) +

-,
)
 

##.

-./ )*+ 
+     +

0%#  )' 1,)

 +

,2+

,

.#'

).

"%.+"34"5%&"# $.#60##.



  The defendants assail the correctness of orders dated 19.10.2016 as well as 04.03.2021.

The plaintiff has filed a suit for recovery of Rs.9,18,497/-, in the year 2016. The learned trial court, after granting 4 opportunities to the defendants to file their defence, has passed the order of striking off their defence. The application filed for re-call of the order has also been dismissed.

The learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that the petitioner-company has engaged a counsel but he did not defend the proceedings properly.

In a case where the petitioner has engaged a counsel of his NARESH KUMAR 2021.11.02 15:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

 

 !

 !

!

choice who did not pursue the case properly, on that account the petitioner cannot be granted indulgence particularly, when the suit for recovery of the amount is pending for the last 5 years. Dismissed.

  

      

   &#7. (5

 8
,2+

,9 #   :6#6.0";3*."% '* :6#6..0.#"7 '* NARESH KUMAR 2021.11.02 15:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document