Stoneridge Enterprises Limited v. Shrivastava

Stoneridge Enterprises Limited v. Shrivastava

The motion judge correctly concluded the appellants produced no evidence the mortgage was renewed and no evidence any post-dated cheques were negotiated; therefore the defence lacked an air of reality and summary judgment for the respondents and an order for possession were properly granted.

Citation
2010 ONCA 665
Parties
Plaintiff (respondent in Appeal): Stoneridge Enterprises Limited; Plaintiff (respondent in Appeal): R.S. Cruse & Associates Ltd.; Respondent (appellant in Appeal): Arun Kumar Shrivastava; Respondent (appellant in Appeal): Rita Shrivastava
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 October 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Mortgage Enforcement / Appeal From Summary Judgment (court of Appeal); Summary Judgment and Possession Ordered Below
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; summary judgment and possession order upheld
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Maturity of Mortgage, Renewal of Mortgage, Post Dated Cheques, Possession
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Real Property Mortgage Enforcement Appeal Summary Judgment Maturity of Mortgage Renewal of Mortgage Post Dated Cheques +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stoneridge Enterprises Limited

Plaintiff (respondent in Appeal)

R.S. Cruse & Associates Ltd.

Plaintiff (respondent in Appeal)

Arun Kumar Shrivastava

Respondent (appellant in Appeal)

Rita Shrivastava

Respondent (appellant in Appeal)

Procedural Posture

Civil Mortgage Enforcement / Appeal From Summary Judgment (court of Appeal); Summary Judgment and Possession Ordered Below

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the mortgage was renewed
  2. 2 Whether the appellants raised a genuine issue for trial
  3. 3 Whether post-dated cheques amounted to renewal or payment

Ratio Decidendi

The motion judge correctly concluded the appellants produced no evidence the mortgage was renewed and no evidence any post-dated cheques were negotiated; therefore the defence lacked an air of reality and summary judgment for the respondents and an order for possession were properly granted.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; summary judgment and possession order upheld

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Summary judgment below for the respondents in the amount of CAD 59379.91 upheld