https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274147 A summary suit founded on a written contract, purchase orders, invoices and the defendant's written balance confirmations remained maintainable despite reference to a running account. Territorial jurisdiction was upheld because the offer originated in Delhi, acceptance was communicated there, the contract was concluded there, and payments were received there. The contractual interest claim at 24% per annum was supported by invoice terms and was not unsubstantiated. A defence based on alleged delay, damage and losses did not justify unconditional leave to defend, as the losses were unparticularised and unsupported; conditional leave was allowed only on deposit of the admitted principal sum. en-us Tue, 02 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Jul 2018 12:31:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274147 A summary suit founded on a written contract, purchase orders, invoices and the defendant's written balance confirmations remained maintainable despite reference to a running account. Territorial jurisdiction was upheld because the offer originated in Delhi, acceptance was communicated there, the contract was concluded there, and payments were received there. The contractual interest claim at 24% per annum was supported by invoice terms and was not unsubstantiated. A defence based on alleged delay, damage and losses did not justify unconditional leave to defend, as the losses were unparticularised and unsupported; conditional leave was allowed only on deposit of the admitted principal sum. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 02 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274147