Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Tribunal’s Compensation Exceeding Claimed Amount Found Just and Fair Under Motor Vehicles Act: No Deduction Errors Warrant Reduction: Gujrat High Court    |     When Two Accused Face Identical Charges, One Cannot Be Convicted While the Other is Acquitted: Supreme Court Emphasizes Principle of Parity in Acquittal    |     Supreme Court Limits Interim Protection for Financial Institutions, Modifies Order on FIRs Filed by Borrowers    |     Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail in Methamphetamine Case After Delay in Chemical Analysis Report    |     No Sign of Recent Intercourse; No Injury Was Found On Her Body Or Private Parts: Gauhati High Court Acquits Two In Gang Rape Case    |     Failure to Disclose Relationship with Key Stakeholder Led to Setting Aside of Arbitral Award: Gujarat High Court    |     Strict Compliance with UAPA's 7-Day Timeline for Sanctions is Essential:  Supreme Court    |     PAT Teachers Entitled to Regularization from 2014, Quashes Prospective Regularization as Arbitrary: Himachal Pradesh High Court    |     Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Anonymity Protections for Victims in Sensitive Cases: Right to Privacy Prevails Over Right to Information    |     Certified Copy of Will Admissible Under Registration Act, 1908: Allahabad HC Dismisses Plea for Production of Original Will    |     Injuries on Non-Vital Parts Do Not Warrant Conviction for Attempt to Murder: Madhya Pradesh High Court Modifies Conviction Under Section 307 IPC to Section 326 IPC    |     Classification Based on Wikipedia Data Inadmissible; Tribunal to Reassess Using Actual Financial Records: PH High Court Orders Reconsideration of Wage Dispute    |     Mere Delay in Initiation Does Not Justify Reduction of Damages: Jharkhand High Court on Provident Fund Defaults    |     Legatee Can Continue Suit Without Probate, But Decree Contingent on Probate Approval: Orissa High Court    |     An Award that Shocks the Conscience of the Court Cannot Stand, Especially When Public Money is Involved: Calcutta HC Reduces Quantum by Half    |     Trademark Transaction Within Territoriality Principle Subject to Indian Tax Laws: Bombay High Court Dismisses Hindustan Unilever's Petition on Non-Deduction of TDS    |     Concealment of Material Facts Bars Relief under Article 226: SC Reprimands Petitioners for Lack of Bonafides    |     Without Determination of the Will's Genuineness, Partition is Impossible: Supreme Court on Liberal Approach to Pleading Amendments    |     Candidates Cannot Challenge a Selection Process After Participating Without Protest : Delhi High Court Upholds ISRO's Administrative Officer Recruitment    |    

High Court Sets Precedent on Importance of Credible Evidence in Financial Disputes: ‘Without Original Books of Account, Claims in Financial Transactions Fall Short’ – Justice Sanjeev Narula”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment that underscores the critical importance of credible evidence in financial disputes, the Delhi High Court, led by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Narula, has set aside a previous decree in a dispute between Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. And Major Balwan Singh, revolving around the payment for diesel supply in a construction project.

The judgment, pronounced on December 1, 2023, emphasizes the crucial role of detailed and corroborative evidence in substantiating financial claims. Justice Narula, in his decisive observation, stated, “Without the original books of account, the suit, which primarily hinges on the twelve invoices, should not have been adjudicated based solely on their mere presentation.” This statement reflects the court’s insistence on the need for concrete evidence in such disputes.

The case, which initially saw a decree mandating the construction company, Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. (Appellant), to pay Rs. 4,08,715/- with 12% interest per annum, was challenged on the grounds of insufficient evidence. The Appellants contended that the payments had been made and recorded, whereas the Respondent failed to produce essential books of account or detailed evidence of outstanding invoices.

Justice Narula highlighted the inadequacies in the trial court’s judgment, noting that the failure to produce books of account was a significant shortcoming. “The existence of invoices was never in dispute,” he remarked, “The central issue was whether the amounts invoiced were still outstanding.”

The High Court’s decision, which overturned the earlier judgment, reinstates the importance of adhering to the principles of evidence, especially in financial litigations. The court’s ruling also accentuates the responsibility of parties in financial disputes to provide sufficient, credible evidence to support their claims.

Date of Decision 01st December, 2023

Afcons-Ltd Vs Major-Balwan-Civil

Similar News