Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: Suit No.1112020 Exparte Judgment 1
Lodged on : 03.01.2020
Registered on : 20.12.2020
Decided on : 14.01.2022
Duration : 01Y 00M 24D
Exhibit 8
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
SUM. SUIT NO.111 OF 2020
(CNR NO. MHCC010001412020)
Gopal Kanayalal Talreja,
Adult, Indian Inhabitant of Bombay,
aged 61 years, the Karta and Manager of
Gopal K.Talreja (H.I.F.), carrying on
business at 34, Dariya MahalA, 80,
Nepeansea Road, Mumbai400006. … Plaintiff
Vs.
1. Rajesh Rasiklal Mehta,
Adult, Indian Inhabitant of Bombay,
age not known carrying on business in
the name and style of R.R.Chem(India),
a Proprietory concern as its Sole
Proprietor at C/401, Padmavati Nagar,
Dumping Road, Mulund (W),
Mumbai 400080.
2. Kanan Rajesh Mehta
Adult, Indian Inhabitant of Bombay,
age not known carrying on business in
the name and style of R.R.Chem(India),
a Proprietory concern as its Sole
Proprietor at C/401, Padmavati Nagar,
Dumping Road, Mulund (W),
Mumbai 400080. ...Defendants
Appearances:
Ld.Adv.Ms.Kavita Lalvani for plaintiff.
None for Defendants.
CORAM : HER HONOUR ADHOC JUDGE
SMT. C.V. PATIL
(C.R.NO.15)
DATE : 14th January 2022
-- 1 of 5 --
Suit No.1112020 Exparte Judgment 2
ORDER
1. This is suit for recovery of an amount of Rs.50,000/ with interest
at the rate of 18% p.a.
2. Brief facts of the case are as under:
The plaintiff is Karta and Manager of Gopal Kanayalal Talreja
(HUF). The plaintiff is carrying on business, the defendant no.1 is also
carrying business in the name of R.R.Chemicals(India). It is a
proprietory concern, defendant no.1 is Sole proprietor. On 08/06/2017
the defendant no.1 has demanded Rs.1,50,000/ from plaintiff for that
valuable consideration he has given bill of exchange which is accepted
by defendant no.2. The amount of Rs.1,50,000/ has been paid by
plaintiff by cheque. Said cheque amount is credited in the account of
defendant. Thereafter, the defendants have repaid total amount of
Rs.1,00,000/ by cheque, cash and NEFT. Out of Rs.1,50,000/,
Rs.50,000/ amount is due from defendants. The plaintiff has started
demanding due amount. But the defendants were asking further time
for payment. Thereafter, plaintiff issued legal notice on 19/09/2019
inspite of service of notice, the defendants failed to repay amount.
Therefore, plaintiff is entitled for recovery of Rs.50,000/ alongwith
interest at the rate of 18%p.a. The plaintiff has calculated interest on
principal amount and as on the date of suit the due amount is shown as
Rs.67,200/. Therefore, this suit.
3. Roznama dated 22/9/2021 shows that inspite of service of
summons defendants failed to appear on record. Accordingly, the suit
proceeded exparte against them. In compliance of exparte order the
plaintiff has filed claim affidavit at Exhibit 6 of witness Gopal Kanayalal
Talreja and documents below Exhibit 7 i.e. notice dated 19/9/2019 and
-- 2 of 5 --
Suit No.1112020 Exparte Judgment 3
bill of exchange. Plaintiff has also filed additional documents that is
cheque and Bank endorsement. There is no document to show that
notice dated 19/9/2019 is duly served on defendants but the
defendants failed to appear on record even inspite of service of
summons.
4. Heard learned advocate for plaintiff. From the pleadings,
documents on record following points arise for consideration to which I
have given reasons before them:
Sr.No. POINTS FINDINGS
1 Does plaintiff prove that Rs.50,000/ is
due from defendants ? In the affirmative
2. Does plaintiff entitled for 18% p.a.
interest on due amount ?
In the affirmative
3. Is plaintiff entitled for due amount with
interest as sought for ?
In the affirmative
4. What order and decree ? Suit is decreed with
costs
REASONS
AS TO POINT NO. 1 TO 3
5. Witness has reiterated the facts of the plaint in the evidence. It is
the submission of plaintiff that plaintiff has given Rs.1,50,000/ out of
which Rs.1,00,000/ amount has been refunded by defendants.
Thereafter, plaintiff made persistent demand for Rs.50,000/ for that
defendant no.2 has given cheque of Rs.50,000/, bearing cheque
No.108720. Plaintiff has presented that cheque in the Bank but it was
returned with endorsement 'Funds Insufficient'. The cheque is
negotiable instrument. From bill of exchange, oral evidence, cheque,
Bank endorsement, it appears that the plaintiff and defendants were
entered into agreement of Rs.1,50,000/ out of which Rs.1,00,000/
-- 3 of 5 --
Suit No.1112020 Exparte Judgment 4
have been repaid by defendants and for balance amount the defendant
no.2 has issued cheque. The said cheque is returned without
encashment. Under Section 80 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the
plaintiff is entitled for 18% p.a. interest on principal amount . Cheque is
negotiable instrument. From oral and documentary evidence, it appears
that Rs.50,000/ are due against defendants towards valuable
consideration. Both the defendants inspite of persistent demand failed
to pay the amount. The plaintiff has calculated the amount as on the
date of suit is Rs.67,250/. Therefore, he is entitled to recover
Rs.67,250/ and 18%p.a.interest on Rs.50,000/ till realisation of
amount. Accordingly, I answer to point no.1 to 3 in the affirmative and
proceed to pass following order:
ORDER
1. Suit is decreed with costs.
2. Defendants no.1 and 2 jointly and severally do pay
Rs.67,250/ alongwith interest at the rate of 18%p.a. on
principal amount of Rs.50,000/ till the realisation of
amount.
3. Decree be drawn up accordingly.
(C.V. PATIL)
Adhoc Judge,
Date : 14/01/2022 City Civil Court, Gr. Bombay
Dictated on : 14/01/2022,
Transcribed on : 19/01/2022,
HHJ signed on :21/01/2022
-- 4 of 5 --
Suit No.1112020 Exparte Judgment 5
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE
ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date Upload Time Name of Stenographer
21/01/2022 1.30p.m. Mrs.Jyoti Mane
Name of the Judge (With Court Room No.) HHJ Smt. C.V.Patil (CR
15)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGEMENT /ORDER
14/01/2022
JUDGEMENT /ORDER signed by P.O. on 21/01/2022
JUDGEMENT /ORDER uploaded on 21/01/2022
-- 5 of 5 --