2001 (1) TMI 869

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....petitioners and purported to enclose post-dated cheques in various amounts to the petitioners. The cheques, which were issued, were dishonoured. According to the petitioners, the petitioners thereafter, addressed a letter on August 19, 1996, to the company by which there was a roll over of the bill rediscounting facility for a further period of 90 days. Together with the said letter, another post-dated cheque came to be enclosed by the company. The petitioners issued a statutory notice for winding up on February 25, 2000, and in reply thereto, there was a letter addressed on March 11, 2000, by the company. By its letter dated March 11, 2000, the company has taken the position that the payments which were made to the petitioners under the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mpany, in its reply, Shri Vikas Dalvi, who was Assistant Vice-President had left the company in April, 1997, and that in any event, he had no authority to issue the said letter. In para. 8 of the reply, it has been stated that only the directors of the company are authorised to sign letters of acknowledgment of liability. No such authority has been conferred upon, any employee. The letter, it is to be noted, does not bear any reference number. Prolixity of pleadings is becoming a fashion of the times. The petitioner has filed its sur-sur-rejoinder in these proceedings on December 21, 2000, by which, for the first time, certain documents have been sought to be relied upon to demonstrate that even after April, 1997, when Vikas Dalvi is all....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ich will have to be adjudicated upon at the trial of the said suit. In the present case, it is necessary to mention that (i) the original of the letter dated April 17, 1997, is not forthcoming though according to the petitioner, it is because the original document has been filed before the Delhi High Court in the pending proceedings ; (ii) the defence of the company is that Vikas Dalvi had left its service in April, 1997 ; (iii) the letter which purportedly has been addressed on April 17, 1997, does not contain any reference number, like many other letters on record, such as those at exhibits C and D, which do contain a reference number ; (iv) a letter which was sought to be relied upon for the purpose of establishing the authority of Vikas....