Final Order 2

Order Details: Copy of Judgment
Pdf Text: Judgment in Com.Suit No.340 of 20211
MHCC010000822019 Presented on : 03012019
Registered on : 21012019
Decided on : 14032022
Duration : Y M D
03 01 21
BEFORE THE CITY CIVIL COURT, MUMBAI
( Court No.14 )
(Presided Over by S. U. Hake)
COMMERCIAL SUIT NO.340 OF 2021
(SUMMARY SUIT NO.131 OF 2019)
Ex.8
PARIDHI ROHITKUMAR SHAH ALIAS
PARIDHI AMRITLAL JAIN.
Through Constituted Attorney Jinesh
Amritlal Jain, aged 28 years, Of Mumbai,
Indian Inhabitant, having her address at
204/A, Adinath Apartment, 281,
Tardeo Road, Mumbai 400 007. ..Plaintiff
VERSUS
1. PLASTOMECH INDUSTRIES.
A partnership firm, duly registered under
the Provisions of the Indian Partnership
Act,1932 having its address at
C/o. Arihantmech Plast Private Limited,
Survey No. 653/1, Plot No.20, Somnath
Cooperative Housing Society, Somnath
Road, Dabhel, Nani Daman 396210
And also having address at
Laxmi Narayan Niwas, Ground Floor,
Opposite Anupam Cinema, Goregoan (East),
Mumbai 400 063.
2. Karan Sanghvi.
Of Mumbai, an adult, Indian Inhabitant,
having his address at Sanghvi Sadan,
2nd Floor, Behind Anupam Cinema,
-- 1 of 7 --
Judgment in Com.Suit No.340 of 20212
Goregoan (East), Mumbai 400 007.
3. Neeraj Kumar Gupta.
Of Mumbai, an adult, Indian Inhabitant,
having his address at A801, Lake Primrose,
Phase 4 Lake Homes, Powai,
Mumbai 400 076.
4. Sunit Kothari.
Both of Mumbai, an adult, Indian
Inhabitant, having his address at
Harmond Mansion, 4th Floor, Motibai
Lane, Nana Chowk, Mumbai 400 007. ..Defendants.
__________________________________________________________
Ld. Advocate Vinay Taliwal for plaintiff.
Defendants – Exparte.
__________________________________________________________
JUDGMENT
(Dated this 14th day of March, 2022)
Suit is for recovery of an amount of Rs.26,35,298.63/
along with future interest.
Briefly stated, plaintiff's case, is as under:
2. Plaintiff is a resident of Mumbai. Defendant No.1
Plastomech Industries is a partnership firm engaged in the business of
trading of Polymer Granules. Defendant nos.2 to 4 are the partners of
defendant no.1 partnership firm. In the year 2016, defendants
approached plaintiff and requested for financial help of Rs.18 lacs for
the purpose of expansion of business of trading of Polymer Granules.
Defendants also agreed to pay monthly interest @ 1.5% from the date
of advancement of loan. Plaintiff transferred an amount of Rs.5 lacs on
03/05/2016, an amount of Rs.9 lacs on 05/05/2016 and an amount of
Rs.4 lacs on 06/06/2016 in the account of defendant no.1 partnership
firm by RTGS. On 01/04/2017, defendant no.2, as an authorized
-- 2 of 7 --
Judgment in Com.Suit No.340 of 20213
representative of defendant no.1 partnership firm, acknowledged and
confirmed due amount of Rs.18 lacs as on 31/03/2017. In April2017,
plaintiff approached defendants and made a demand of due amount.
But, defendants requested for time to make the payment. Due to
cordial relationship with defendants, plaintiff granted time to repay the
amount. Plaintiff contacted defendants on several times, but,
defendants failed to pay the due amount. Therefore, plaintiff sent legal
notice through advocate on 29/10/2018. Said notice was duly served
on defendants, but, defendants failed to pay the amount. Hence, this
suit is filed under Order 37 of C.P.C. on the basis of confirmation of
accounts.
3. Writ of summons was duly served upon the defendants.
Defendants appeared as contemplated u/o. 37 Rule 2(3) of C.P.C.
Thereafter, plaintiff has taken out Summons for judgment. Defendants
applied for leave to defend the suit unconditionally. This Court by
order dated 18/09/2021 passed in Summons for Judgement
No.110/2019, granted conditional leave to defend the suit on
depositing an amount of Rs.18 Lacs within a period of 12 weeks.
However, defendants failed to deposit said amount within stipulated
period. Therefore, matter proceeded exparte.
4. Heard Ld. advocate for plaintiff. Following points arise for
determination, findings thereon for the reasons to follow, are as under:
Sr. No. POINTS FINDINGS
1. Does the plaintiff prove that an amount
of Rs.26,35,298.63/ is outstanding
against the defendants ?
Proved
2. What order and decree ? Suit is decreed as
per final order.
-- 3 of 7 --
Judgment in Com.Suit No.340 of 20214
REASONS
Point No.1.
5. In order to substantiate the claim, plaintiff has filed claim
affidavit of its CA PW1 Jinesh Jain at Exh.5. Plaintiff relied upon
documents filed below list Exh.6. Documents filed on record show that
plaintiff transferred an amount of Rs.5 lacs on 03/05/2016, an amount
of Rs.9 lacs on 05/05/2016 and an amount of Rs.4 lacs on 06/06/2016
in the account of defendant No.1 partnership firm by R.T.G.S. Plaintiff
further placed reliance upon confirmation of accounts given by
defendant No.2 as a partner of defendant No.1 partnership firm.
Defendant No.2 confirmed due amount of Rs.18 lacs as on 31/03/2017.
6. Plaintiff submits that defendant agreed to pay interest @
18% p.a. Defendants failed to contest the suit. Therefore, plaintiff’s
claim for interest remained unchallenged. By applying interest @ 18%
p.a. on principal amount of Rs.18 lacs, plaintiff claimed an amount of
Rs.26,35,298.63/. Said claim is well supported by documents filed on
record. Thus, plaintiff has succeeded to prove that an amount of
Rs.26,35,298.63/ is outstanding against defendants. Hence, point
No.1 is answered accordingly.
7. Taking into consideration the nature of the transaction,
plaintiff is entitled to the interest at the rate of 18 % p.a. from the date
of filing of the suit till it's realization. As per section 25 of the
Partnership Act, every partner is liable, jointly with all other partners
and also severally, for all acts of the firm done while he is a partner.
Therefore, defendant nos.1 to 4 are jointly and severally liable to pay
aforesaid amount to plaintiff. In the result, following order:
ORDER
1. Suit is decreed with costs.
-- 4 of 7 --
Judgment in Com.Suit No.340 of 20215
2. Defendant Nos.1 to 4 shall pay jointly and severally an
amount of Rs.26,35,298.63/ (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs Thirty
Five Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Eight and paise Sixty
Three only) alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. to plaintiff on
principal amount of Rs.18,00,000/ from the date of the suit
till it's realization within two months.
3. Court fees be refunded as per (E) Rules framed under
Section 11(2) of the Bombay City Civil Court Act, 1948, for
the refund of Institution Fee.
4. Decree thus follow.
SUNIL U. HAKE
JUDGE,
CITY CIVIL COURT,
14/03/2022 GR.MUMBAI.
Direct Typed on :14/03/2022
Checked on :14/03/2022
Signed on :
-- 5 of 7 --
Judgment in Com.Suit No.340 of 20216
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”.
16/02/22 at 03.30 pm.
Mrs.P.R.Wagh
Name of the Judge HHJ SHRI SU Hake
Date of Pronouncement of
judgment/order
16/02/22
Judgment and order signed by P.O. 16/02/22
Judgment/order uploaded on 16/02/22
-- 6 of 7 --
Judgment in Com.Suit No.340 of 20217
-- 7 of 7 --