IR2017 SC 1577 , 2017 (2 )AJR702 , 2017 (4 )ALD29 , 2017 (122 ) ALR 525 , 2017 (3 )ALT21 , 2017 (3 )BomCR439 , (2017 )4 CALLT57 (SC ), 2017 (2 ) CCC 83 (SC ), 2017 (3 )CDR387 (SC ), 2018 (2 ) CHN (SC ) 134 , 2017 (2 )CLJ(SC )129 , 2017 (3 )CLJ(SC )153 , 123 (2017 )CLT1106 , 2017 (I )CLR(SC)916 , 2017 GLH(2 )164 , 2017 (3 ) Him. LR. (NULL ) 1683 , 2017 INSC 248 , 2017 -3 -LW751 , 2017 (6 )MhLj47 , 2017 (4 )MPLJ375 , 2017 (2 )RCR(Civil)1047 , 2017 136 RD384 , 2017 (3 )RLW1798 (SC ), 2017 (3 )SCALE627 , (2017 )5 SCC371 , 2017 (8 ) SCJ 482 , [2017 ]3 SCR681 , (2017 )4 WBLR(SC )626 , ,MANU/SC/0282/2017Arun Mishra#Amitava Roy#271SC3050Judgment/OrderAIC#AIR#AJR#ALD#ALR#ALT#BomCR#CalLT#CCC#CDR#CHN#CLJ#CLJ#CLT#CurLR#GLH#Him. LR.#INSC#LW#MANU#MhLJ#MPLJ#RCR (Civil)#RD#RLW#SCALE#SCC#SCJ#SCR#WBLRAmitava Roy,SUPREME COURT OF INDIA2017-3-2220261 -->

MANU/SC/0282/2017

True Court CopyTM English

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal Nos. 4313-4314 of 2017 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 20745-20746 of 2016)

Decided On: 21.03.2017

Appellants: Brakewel Automotive Components (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Respondent: P.R. Selvam Alagappan

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Arun Mishra and Amitava Roy

JUDGMENT

Amitava Roy, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The subject matter of impeachment is the order dated 3.6.2016 rendered in CRP (NPD) 1499 of 2016 and CMP No. 8225 of 2016 by the High Court of Judicature at Madras, thereby rejecting the prayer of the Appellant/plaintiff/decree-holder (for short, hereinafter to be referred to as "the Appellant") to eschew evidence of the Respondent/defendant/judgment-debtor (for short, hereinafter to be referred to as "the Respondent") in a proceeding Under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (as amended) (hereinafter to be referred to as "CPC/Code"), as well as to dismiss such application as not maintainable. By the order impugned, the High Court has affirmed the determination made to the same effect by the Executing Court.

3. We have heard Mr. J.S. Bakshi, learned Counsel for the Appellant and Mr. M.P. Parthiban, learned Counsel for the Respondent.

4. The genesis of the present lis is traceable to Civil Suit (OS) No. 1690 of 2010 instituted before the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi by the Appellant against the Respondent arrayed as the proprietor of M/s. Kargaappa Auto Products and M/s. Paans Auto Products for recovery of Rs. 20,94,953/- arising from business transactions between the parties. While the Appellant described itself to be a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of auto components/parts, the Respondent was introduced as the proprietor of the afore-named proprietorship firms. According to the Appellant, the Respondent approached it in the month of November, 2002 for a business deal and on the basis of the bargain entered into, it supplied auto components and parts to the Respondent, as per the specifications mentioned and raised bills in connection therewith.

5. As per the books of account maintained in the regular course of business, at the relevant time i.e. 15.10.2007, Rs. 8,01,708/- was due and outstanding against the Respondent in the accounts of M/s. Kargaappa Auto Products and Rs. 4,93,952/- as on 6.6.2008, in the account of M/s. Paans Auto Products, thus totalling Rs. 12,95,660/-. As this amount was not paid inspite of repe........