Final Order 10

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: HPI Industries vs. Neue Light Pvt. Ltd.
CNR No.: DLSH01-000276-2024
CS (Comm.) No. 44/2024
12.11.2025
Present : Mr. Anuj Kumar, Ld. Counsel with Ms. Neelam
Malik, Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff.
Mr. Naman Shankar, Ld. Counsel for the defendant.
Mr. Vinay Sinha, AR of the defendant (
through
Video Conferencing).
O R D E R
1. The defendant filed and supplied written
statement alongwith an application under Order 8
Rule 1 CPC seeking condonation of delay in filing
of written statement.
2. There is delay of six days in filing of written
statement. The delay is trivial.
3. Accordingly, the application under Order 8
Rule 1 CPC filed by the defendant is allowed. Delay
of 6 days in filing of written statement is condoned.
Written statement is taken on record.
4. Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff stated that he
does not wish to file replication.
5. The Court has heard arguments in order to
ascertain as to whether any triable issue arises.
6. The plaintiff is seeking a decree for recovery
of Rs. 6,07,853/- alongwith
pendente-lite and future
interest @ 18% per annum on the averments that the
plaintiff supplied ‘
solder wires’ to the defendant
w.e.f. 23.06.2021 to 26.11.2021,
vide tax invoices
and
e-way bills.
7. According to ledger filed by the defendant, an
amount of Rs. 6,07,853/- was due, as on 10.08.2022.
8. In the written statement, the defendant has
admitted the said transactions with the plaintiff.
-- 1 of 4 --
9. The defendant has filed a statement of account
(
at Page No. 14 of the written statement) wherein an
amount of Rs. 6,07,853/- is shown due to the
plaintiff, as on 10.08.2022.
10. As such, there is categorical, unequivocal and
unambiguous admission of the liability to the extent
of Rs. 6,07,853/- by the defendant.
11. During arguments, Ld. Counsel for the
defendant referred Para No. 8 to 13 of ‘
Preliminary
Objections / Submissions’ of the written statement
that the plaintiff supplied inferior quality of goods
and failed to receive them despite repeated request
and thereby, the defendant suffered huge loss. Ld.
Counsel for the defendant further contended that the
defendant approached the plaintiff to settle the
account and return the said goods to the plaintiff but
the plaintiff avoided on one or other pretext.
12. However, the defendant has not stated the
particular of invoice(s) against which inferior quality
of the goods were delivered. The defendant has not
stated the quantity of the goods and the computation
of amount of inferior quality of goods. The defendant
neither debited any amount regarding alleged supply
of inferior quality of the goods in its ledger nor raised
or supplied any debit note. The defence raised by the
defendant is quite general and casual without any
factual or documentary foundation.
13. In view of unequivocal, unambiguous and
categorical admission on the part of the defendant,
the Court is of the considered opinion that a judgment
on admission under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC should be
passed.
-- 2 of 4 --
14. In view of categorical admission by the
defendant in the written statement and statement of
account, this Court in exercise of its power under
Order 12 Rule 6 CPC is passing a judgment on
admission in the written statement.
15. As regards issue
qua pendente-lite and future
interest, Section 34 of ‘
The Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 ’ confers discretion upon the Court
to grant
pendente-lite and future interest. In view of
nature of transaction, the plaintiff is entitled to
pendente-lite and future interest @ 9% per annum.
16. On perusal of the proceedings, it is seen that
the suit was instituted on 15.01.2024 and the Court
had pointed out certain technical defects therein.
However, the plaintiff did not rectify the defects and
allowed the suit to be dismissed for non-prosecution
on 22.02.2024. The suit was restored to its original
number on 20.05.2025 and thereafter, the plaintiff
did not take any step for the prosecution of the suit
till 22.09.2025. Therefore, the suit remained
dormant w.e.f. 15.01.2024 to 22.09.2025 on account
of inaction on the part of the plaintiff and therefore,
the plaintiff will not be entitled to interest on the suit
amount for the said period.
17. Accordingly, the suit of the plaintiff is
decreed with costs and a decree in the sum of Rs.
6,07,853/- alongwith
pendente-lite and future
interest @ 9% per annum (
excluding the period
from 15.01.2024 to 22.09.2025) is passed in favour
of the plaintiff and against the defendant. Decree
sheet be drawn.
-- 3 of 4 --
18. File be consigned to record room.
Sanjay Sharma-II
DJ (Commercial Court)-03
Shahdara, KKD, Delhi
NK 12.11.2025
-- 4 of 4 --