ANKIT BANSAL vs S. PARAMJEET SINGH KHURANA

Judgment text excerpt

$~69 & 71 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 26th March, 2025 + CM(M) 546/2025 & CM APPL. 17260-17261/2025 ANKIT BANSAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Vishal Ranjan, Advocate versus S. PARAMJEET SINGH KHURANA .....Respondent Through: Advocate (Appearance not given) + CM(M) 3573/2024 & CM APPL. 5950/2025 ANKIT BANSAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Vishal Ranjan, Advocate versus S. PARAMJEET SINGH KHURANA .....Respondent Through: Advocate (Appearance not given) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Both the aforesaid petitions emanate from the same suit and have been filed by the defendant. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, both the petitions have been taken up together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 3. The following issues, as amended by order dated 23.08.2024, were framed by the learned Trial Court: - 1. Whether the firm M/s. Video Voice INC has been dissolved as per law? If yes, then whether accounts were settled after rendition of accounts between the parties? OPD Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 546/2025 & CM(M) 3573/2024 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:27.03.2025 15:11:58 2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of Rs. 1,03,15,022 inclusive of interest upto 31.5.2020?/- (OPP) 3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the interest. If yes at what rate?(OPP) 4. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for decree of permanent injunction retraining D-1 from creating third party rights in respect of capital of Mis Video voice INC? (OPP) 5. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled for decree of declaration in respect of personal assets of D-1 to D-3 and an order of permanent injunction retraining them from creating third party rights in respect of their movable and immovabl